Thread: Nov 22nd 1963 The Kennedy Assassination

I even heard a conspiracy that Oswald was only in the depository in order to bring some books for the shooter on the grassy knoll to stand on in order to see over the fence to shoot Kennedy

It never ends does it?

I have an opinion.....
As someone who was "NRA expert" at the time of the assassination and later
tied range records in the army and have since fired 10,000+ rounds from 0.177" to 8".
And, yes machine guns help with the count....

While I have been lucky in life and never had to fire in anger at others....

I believe, one man could have been the only person firing at the President
and responsible for the act.

The problem with this topic is that too much time has passed.
Our expectations from CSI television are so extraordinary
and mismatched to the technology of the time.

Based on the physical evidence -- I doubt that
anything will change. Those that doubt a single
shooter will continue to doubt. I do believe that
the powers that be at that time had a healthy dose
of paranoia and a palpable belief in global conspiracy
and global bad guys because of what they saw in
Korea and WW2.

IMO, There would have been no cover-up if evidence
opened a door no mater how ugly. JFK was well liked
even by those that did not agree with his politics.

This was a mad man -- perhaps as crazy as the
man that shot Gabrielle Giffords.

It's not that I don't believe there is more to it than the public story.
It's just that some theories are unlikely in the extreme (such as the accidental discharge theory).

Just because grains of the story may be true does not validate the whole story.
That is there you can't really talk with the 'black and white' people anymore.

For example, the trading discrepancies right before the 911 attacks struck indicate that some people -possibly inside the government- were aware that 'something' bad was going to happen. And it could even be that some agencies were aware that something was going to happen but noone connected all the dots. Fine. But that does not mean that I have to give credibility to the people who claim that the 911 towers were wired for controlled demolition or that the government orchestrated the flights.

This is a discussion I had with denmason iirc.

Most of those farfetched theories are just bollocks. I conced that every now and again, one could be true. It's a strange world.
But usually, the same people who believe that the kennedy assissination was a government job also believe
- that the moonlanding was staged.
- that the government is hiding evidence of aliens.
- that the government is behind the 911 attacks all the way.
- that Obama is not an American after all.
- that contrails are not vapor trails.
- ...

If you believe that all those things are true, then you are no longer living in the land of the sane.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I know nothing about guns so this may be a looney questions, but surely, people tasked with protecting the president carry pistols, not rifles. And I don't think a secret service pistol would make the head explode?

Sure, snipers on the roof could have such a discharge, but then they would have to be pointing AT the president during the motorcade, and it is highly unlikely that that would be the case.

Not a pistol, there was a CAR-15 in the vehicle behind Kennedy, at that point in time... these weapons were known for accidental discharge from a jar to the butt or the muzzle, they could sometimes discharge from just releasing the bolt as it slammed froward...
This theory was brought out in a book by one of the guys that actually re-created the shoot and managed it... Before the 9 second and 11 second times were brought forth...

He was also one of the first that I know of that showed the "Straight Path" of the magic bullet

Personally I feel that LHO was the only gunman there and fired the shots that killed Kennedy. I also think that he was put up to the task by the mob, though I wouldn't completely rule out. Members of the US government. It's not like they haven't been involved in conspiracies before.

Here is the info I was citing BTW

Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The book was a good read too

I read the book. I don't buy it but that is neither here nor there.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

... As far as benefit, the military industrial complex, that Eisenhower warned 'us' to beware of, benefited greatly. Instead of pulling troops out of Viet Nam we had a change of government that escalated the war greatly.

That same military industrial complex would have benefited (and did, in fact) from an expansion of the space program, which Kennedy put into motion. At the time of his assassination, there were very few troops to actually pull out of Viet Nam. If anyone was going to be killed by the millitary industrial complex, it would have been Nixon, who actually oversaw the disengagement from that war

LBJ hated the Kennedys, so did J Edgar Hoover, Allan Dulles, the former head of the CIA, whom Kennedy fired.

Lot's of CIA directors have been fired. And many of them have intense personal dislike for sitting presidents. What they are able to do with the press is often just as effective (and considerably safer) as what can be done with an assassination.

The list of people who were in high places in and out of government who hated the Kennedys was long.

That list is long for every president. A grudge isn't enough evidence. What makes this grudge bad enough to commit the ultimate treason?

Furthermore, neither Hoover nor Dulles gained any significant benefit from the assassination. You could argue that LBJ did, but he refused to run for a second term, so clearly the presidency didn't hold that much appeal for him. No, I don't see the fingerprints of anyone so high up in government on this one.

Anyway, the thing is if a person looks at Nov 22, 1963 and what happened within the next 48 hours it is harder to see connections. A long before and after view needs to be considered to piece some of the puzzle together. To me, not knowing for sure who was involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK , I am firmly convinced there was a conspiracy.

I agree with you about half way. I think it's very possible that there was a conspiracy, and I agree that all of facts need to be examined closely. You and I differ in that I'm not convinced, one way or the other (though I lean towards the "Lone Gunman" theory).

It is plain to see that there was and still is a coverup by the government of the United States and large portions of the established media.

They don't have the greatest reputation for being truthful (and they've certainly earned that), but I don't think it's a given that everything that they do is a coverup.

Those who think that the USA, the guys with the 'white hats,' wouldn't do such a thing are being naive. There is no question that Patrice Lumumba, Ngo Dinh Diem, and Allende were , if not directly killed by US intelligence, 'we' aided and abetted. In 1963 if someone had accused the CIA of plotting to kill Fidel Castro at the behest of the US government they would have been considered crazy, if not traitorous. We learned through the Church committee hearings that this was exactly what happened. Why is it so far fetched to believe that those people who contributed to that wouldn't have killed our president ?

Well, this is sort of a false dichotomy. Just because I don't believe that there was government conspiracy in this instance doesn't mean that I don't think they capable of authoring pretty horrible crimes for the benefit of US interests (meaning large business interests) abroad and even at home. The US government (like every government on the planet) has done some pretty underhanded and criminal shenanigans (hell, I've even been a part of a few of them). But they don't have a monopoly on that. Individuals sometimes do things too.

One other thing that pushes me toward the LHO did it, and he did it alone theory is the General Walker attempt that is very compelling

Originally Posted by gssixgun

One other thing that pushes me toward the LHO did it, and he did it alone theory is the General Walker attempt that is very compelling

I had forgotten about that! I had read about it in Manchester's Death of a President. That definitely sets Oswald up as a "lone nut" no?