JFK , his life and legacy.

[Zingari]

Right , for anyone that believes the magic bullet theory , listen to Nellie Connally describing the order of events in the car that day , She clearly states that JFK  and Governor Connally are hit by different bullets with a time gape in between . This account alone makes magic bullet theory highly questionable . If they wer hit with different bullet , the whole theory falls apart.

Fast forward to 5 mins approx 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZM3gVYmsPs

 

I admit that she states she believed all the bullets come from the rear , but it's more likely she would be correct in the assertion of the order of events that the direction of the bullets. 

[Guest ttfn]

Right , for anyone that believes the magic bullet theory , listen to Nellie Connally describing the order of events in the car that day , She clearly states that JFK and Governor Connally are hit by different bullets with a time gape in between . This account alone makes magic bullet theory highly questionable . If they wer hit with different bullet , the whole theory falls apart.

Fast forward to 5 mins approx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZM3gVYmsPs

I admit that she states she believed all the bullets come from the rear , but it's more likely she would be correct in the assertion of the order of events that the direction of the bullets.

I'm with you until the last sentence, which is an astonishingly selective interpretation of the evidence.

[ADK]

How good a marksman was LHO? The trouble with a lot of the documentories is they show evidence from one POV or another. The one the other week led to the conclusion that it was an accident. I would rather believe that than it being a plot. Was it possible that LHO could fire three quick shots in succession when an expert marksman could not? There was only one fatal shot as far as I am aware. The other two missed.

 

He was a good marksman and yes it has been proven that a trained marksman could fire 3 shots in succession. 2 of the shots hit the president, one in the back which passed through and hit the man in front as well and one in the head.

[Zingari]

I'm with you until the last sentence, which is an astonishingly selective interpretation of the evidence.

everyone else seems to be selective , so i'm just joining in 

[Zingari]

He was a good marksman and yes it has been proven that a trained marksman could fire 3 shots in succession. 2 of the shots hit the president, one in the back which passed through and hit the man in front as well and one in the head.

he was classed as a "marksman" , which is the lowest grade.

 and do try to listen to nellie conally vid (fast forward  five mins) if you believe they were hit by the same bullet  

[OzFox]

Right , for anyone that believes the magic bullet theory , listen to Nellie Connally describing the order of events in the car that day , She clearly states that JFK  and Governor Connally are hit by different bullets with a time gape in between . This account alone makes magic bullet theory highly questionable . If they wer hit with different bullet , the whole theory falls apart.

Fast forward to 5 mins approx 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZM3gVYmsPs

 

I admit that she states she believed all the bullets come from the rear , but it's more likely she would be correct in the assertion of the order of events that the direction of the bullets. 

 

Only a died in the wool conspiracist could make a statement like that. Take the little bit of testimony that suits your story, and dismiss the rest of it.

 

Both the Connelly's said all the shots came from the right rear. I'd interpret that as "bang goes your picket fence/ back and to the left" codswallop.

 

Fascinating interview though, so thanks for posting it

[Jimothy]

He was a good marksman and yes it has been proven that a trained marksman could fire 3 shots in succession. 2 of the shots hit the president, one in the back which passed through and hit the man in front as well and one in the head.

Maybe Zing will be able to confirm this, but I'm pretty sure all test with the same gun proved that it was impossible to fire 3 shots in that time scale, even for the very best marksman. Oswald was trained but he wasn't the very best.

Also, and again maybe Zing will know more, was it ever questioned in the Warren Commission investigation why Oswald waited until the car was on Deeley Plaza creating a much more difficult shot, and he didn't shoot him before they turned which would have been a much easier shot.

[Zingari]

Did LHO ever admit to actually shooting? ... I watched a video of LHO's death yesterday (for the first time), and the reporter seems to ask 'did you shoot the president?' and before LHO can answer, Ruby pops out of nowhere, and "the rest is history".

 

-- Sorry for the simple questions, I've only just starting watching all the videos and getting into this more.

No,  Oswald  continually denied shooting anyone and he stated he was a "patsy" , very few people had ever heard that term back then , it means he knew he had been set up to take the blame  .

I hope you continue to be interested, i think it really is a fascinating part of history but it is a feckin minefield , so be warned    

 

Only a died in the wool conspiracist could make a statement like that. Take the little bit of testimony that suits your story, and dismiss the rest of it.

 

Both the Connelly's said all the shots came from the right rear. I'd interpret that as "bang goes your picket fence/ back and to the left" codswallop.

 

Fascinating interview though, so thanks for posting it

 

Only a died in the wool conspiracist could make a statement like that. Take the little bit of testimony that suits your story, and dismiss the rest of it.

 

Both the Connelly's said all the shots came from the right rear. I'd interpret that as "bang goes your picket fence/ back and to the left" codswallop.

 

Fascinating interview though, so thanks for posting it

we're both dismissing evidence to suit ourselves  then 

[Guest ttfn]

Didn't the police give LHO a test to see if he'd fired a gun...which he failed (i.e. He hadn't fired a gun recently).

I'm not certain that (from the evidence made publicly available) LHO would ever have been convicted in a court of law.

[ADK]

Maybe Zing will be able to confirm this, but I'm pretty sure all test with the same gun proved that it was impossible to fire 3 shots in that time scale, even for the very best marksman. Oswald was trained but he wasn't the very best.

Also, and again maybe Zing will know more, was it ever questioned in the Warren Commission investigation why Oswald waited until the car was on Deeley Plaza creating a much more difficult shot, and he didn't shoot him before they turned which would have been a much easier shot.

 

I've seen videos where they prove it was possible.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCINoQ3hNGg

[OzFox]

Maybe Zing will be able to confirm this, but I'm pretty sure all test with the same gun proved that it was impossible to fire 3 shots in that time scale, even for the very best marksman. Oswald was trained but he wasn't the very best.

Also, and again maybe Zing will know more, was it ever questioned in the Warren Commission investigation why Oswald waited until the car was on Deeley Plaza creating a much more difficult shot, and he didn't shoot him before they turned which would have been a much easier shot.

 

Depends on whose timescale you're using. I think it's pretty much accepted now that it wasn't "Six Seconds in Dallas" but around 8-9 seconds 

 

Even so, an FBI weapons expert fired three accurate shots with Oswald's actual rifle in 4.5 seconds

[Zingari]

Maybe Zing will be able to confirm this, but I'm pretty sure all test with the same gun proved that it was impossible to fire 3 shots in that time scale, even for the very best marksman. Oswald was trained but he wasn't the very best.

Also, and again maybe Zing will know more, was it ever questioned in the Warren Commission investigation why Oswald waited until the car was on Deeley Plaza creating a much more difficult shot, and he didn't shoot him before they turned which would have been a much easier shot.

As far as i'm aware there are marksmen capable of firing 3 rounds in the 6 seconds , but also as far as i know , most of them had to take several attempts to achieve it with accuracy . and also the biggest problem is that to achieve this  the shots are equally spaced apart , but most witnesses say there was "bang .. bang .................pause ...bang" and the space between the bangs is not long enough 

 

Why he didn't shoot as the car approached is a very good question , it leads most of us that doesn't believe the official story to conclude that the pre planned  killing zone was just after the last turn which meant the car had to slow down to 4 or 5 mph , and the perfect position for an assassination attempt .

[OzFox]

No,  Oswald  continually denied shooting anyone and he stated he was a "patsy" , very few people had ever heard that term back then , it means he knew he had been set up to take the blame  .

I hope you continue to be interested, i think it really is a fascinating part of history but it is a feckin minefield , so be warned    

 

 

we're both dismissing evidence to suit ourselves  then 

 

There's no winners in this argument, and probably never will be.

 

I'm off to New York in a few days. Gonna visit the scene of your other obsession

 

.

[Zingari]

There's no winners in this argument, and probably never will be.

 

I'm off to New York in a few days. Gonna visit the scene of your other obsession

 

.

have a great time Oz , always good talking to you   

[OzFox]

have a great time Oz , always good talking to you   

 

Cheers  Same to you

[pSinatra]

Do we know how wayward the shot was where it hit the kerb?

 

LHO's first shot - he would have had time to take aim & get a decent shot off.  His second shot - he rushed it & he got nowhere near his target.  The third shot - must have come from someone else or somewhere else?  Assuming that LHO was involved in the shooting?

 

 

That aside, I've been a little perturbed every time I've seen any of the 50th anniversary stuff on the news (BBC mainly).  They'll have some reporter stood outside the Dallas Book Depository, pointing up to the 6th floor window, saying "and it's from that window that Lee Harvey Oswald took 3 shots & assassinated the president".  How can he make such a statement on what is nothing more than speculation? 

[ADK]

It's not speculation.

[davieG]

Do we know how wayward the shot was where it hit the kerb?

 

LHO's first shot - he would have had time to take aim & get a decent shot off.  His second shot - he rushed it & he got nowhere near his target.  The third shot - must have come from someone else or somewhere else?  Assuming that LHO was involved in the shooting?

 

 

That aside, I've been a little perturbed every time I've seen any of the 50th anniversary stuff on the news (BBC mainly).  They'll have some reporter stood outside the Dallas Book Depository, pointing up to the 6th floor window, saying "and it's from that window that Lee Harvey Oswald took 3 shots & assassinated the president".  How can he make such a statement on what is nothing more than speculation? 

Isn't that the 'official' line? If they suggested anything else in a 'news' report they'd be accused of bias. There's been a fair few programmes and bloggs from writers on BBC outlets on the various theories.

[Zingari]

Do we know how wayward the shot was where it hit the kerb?

 

LHO's first shot - he would have had time to take aim & get a decent shot off.  His second shot - he rushed it & he got nowhere near his target.  The third shot - must have come from someone else or somewhere else?  Assuming that LHO was involved in the shooting?

 

 

That aside, I've been a little perturbed every time I've seen any of the 50th anniversary stuff on the news (BBC mainly).  They'll have some reporter stood outside the Dallas Book Depository, pointing up to the 6th floor window, saying "and it's from that window that Lee Harvey Oswald took 3 shots & assassinated the president".  How can he make such a statement on what is nothing more than speculation? 

The shot is said to have hit the kerb down near the underpass that was in front of the motorcade ,But paradoxically this is the first shot, so the most wayward shot  

 Flying concrete from the kerb hit James Teague and this meant the original account was wrong because now all of JFK ( apart from the headshot) and Conally's wounds had to be explained by a single bullet . This explanation became known as the single bullet theory . But if the commission is supposed to have all the facts , why did it not say this happened in the first place ?

it sounds very much like a theory that is determined to keep coming to the same conclusion regardless 

[Zingari]

It's not speculation.

yes it is,  Oswald hasn't been tried and convicted of anything in a court of law has he ?

 

 

[Guest ttfn]

It's not speculation.

But neither is it proven fact.

I feel like you should be able to try dead people if they've been arrested and interviewed extensively. Ultimately we know what Oswald would have said about the incident itself (forget about the "conspiracy" - that's a different matter) from the fact that he refused to confess even under pressure on his deathbed. We know where he claims to have been. We know his background and "motive".

I just think that justice was denied by Oswald being shot. He's unequivocally guilty in the eyes of millions for a crime that he may well have committed but for which he has never been committed.

I'd like to hear a proper balanced trial, where the jury is shown BOTH sides of the story. Due to the phenomenal public interest in the story, people have dragged up their own evidence and the quantity of it is astonishing, as much as the quality of it is often questionable.

[pSinatra]

Isn't that the 'official' line? If they suggested anything else in a 'news' report they'd be accused of bias. There's been a fair few programmes and bloggs from writers on BBC outlets on the various theories.

 

I not being 100% serious.  I know that's the 'official' line.  It's just that when there has been so much speculation over 50 years.....it always seems a little odd hearing it said in such a matter of fact way.

[davieG]

I not being 100% serious.  I know that's the 'official' line.  It's just that when there has been so much speculation over 50 years.....it always seems a little odd hearing it said in such a matter of fact way.

Fair point, I actually had similar thoughts when I saw it, it's said in such a 'matter of fact' way.

[...............]

People only believe conspiracy theories because they don't know the actual facts!

[Zingari]

This might be interesting 

 

Will 'long-hidden footage of second shooter' to be aired this week prove Lee Harvey Oswald did NOT act alone?
 

http://www.thewrap.com/jfk-assassination-new-footage-producer-stephen-bowen-lee-harvey-oswald

 

probably a hoax or inconclusive and grainy  , but you never know .