JFK:Inside The Target Car - Discovery Channel UK 9pm tonight

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 11:50am

King Mob wrote: »

So please clarify this.
Do you believe it is impossible for the rifle to get off 3 shots in 8 seconds?

I have no idea if its possible to get off 3 shots in 8 seconds but the point is moot. The question is could Oswald aim and fire 3 shots with that gun and shot 2 being the kill shot at a moving target with trees in the way at times and to that I don't THINK (based on what i've read) he could have.

King Mob wrote: »

Maybe you should elaborate.

just have a read about Oswalds actions in the TSBD and when he was spotted and so on. Very interesting reading. No point in listing it out here.
What about that Altgens photo of someone at the other window on the 6th floor at the same time as oswald was meant to be there. Thats pretty interesting too.

BTW, is this the biggest thread hijack of all time or wha!

King Mob · 01-05-2009 11:57am

artvandulet wrote: »

I have no idea if its possible to get off 3 shots in 8 seconds but the point is moot. The question is could Oswald aim and fire 3 shots with that gun and shot 2 being the kill shot at a moving target with trees in the way at times and to that I don't THINK (based on what i've read) he could have.

Well it's pretty important to the situation if he can actually fire three shots let alone aim.

Again no one here has been able to show exactly how this would be impossible.

But you can agree it's possible to make the shot?

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 12:04pm

King Mob wrote: »

Well it's pretty important to the situation if he can actually fire three shots let alone aim.

Again no one here has been able to show exactly how this would be impossible.

But you can agree it's possible to make the shot?

Ok here ye go. I think it is possible for someone to shoot a rifle 3 times in 8 seconds.
But that still doesnt mean I think Oswald could shoot that rifle and do what he did with it! I'm not even sure he was there to begin with!

Can you recommend a newer book on the JFK thing for me? - as i said in my 1st post I used to read lots on it but haven't for a few years. I just stumbled on this thread and its the first time in ages I've thought about it.
FWIW I always liked Anthony Summers book and highly recommend it. Robert Grodens photo book is interesting to look at too.

Diogenes · 01-05-2009 12:13pm

bog master wrote: »

Apologies for not quoting and highlighting points, a bit new to the board.

Vincent Palamara is considered by most JFK Assasination researchers as the expert in the area of the Secret Service and has written numerous articles and books.

Rubbish. He's a self proclaimed expert cited by kooks and idiots like Jim Fetzer.

If you believe him to be a world renowned expert on the secret service could you please explain how when you google "Vincent Palamara" the fourth link is to his Myspace page where he declares himself as a "SECRET SERVICE expert & guitarist".

This is not exactly the profile of someone who should be considered an expert in any field.

The Presidential Car was a convertible with both plastic and metal removable roofs, and yes neither were bulletproof,

So it's a red herring then, at best it could have provided concealment. JFK only used the roof in inclement weather, and it was a fine day in Dallas.

Ordering agents of the car and removal of bubbletop? , perhaps we wil never know as evidence at times is conflicting. http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/limo.html

Again the quotes simply say "JFK was very co-operative with his agents". But the FACT remains that agents were not placed on the running boards of the presidential limo on several previous occasions.

There was nothing unusual about agents not being on the car that day.

I dont believe that the SS Agents were drinking in Jack Ruby's Club, but the fact they were out drinking is damning itself.

It's a sign of a lapse of judgement. Why are you saying it is damning?

The reactions of most of the agents was dismally slow and I sometimes do wonder about the actions of Bill Greer driving the car! And how many people know he was Irish, born in Tyrone?

Because it's not really relevant?

King Mob · 01-05-2009 12:13pm

artvandulet wrote: »

Ok here ye go. I think it is possible for someone to shoot a rifle 3 times in 8 seconds.
But that still doesnt mean I think Oswald could shoot that rifle and do what he did with it! I'm not even sure he was there to begin with!

But why couldn't he do it?
People have made much much harder shots than that.

Diogenes · 01-05-2009 12:18pm

artvandulet wrote: »

I'm not even sure he was there to begin with!

You mean the dozens of co workers who saw him in work that day, as well as the police officer who searched the building challenged Oswald and had his identity confirmed by his manager?

Can you recommend a newer book on the JFK thing for me? .

Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK

Diogenes · 01-05-2009 12:19pm

artvandulet wrote: »

I have no idea if its possible to get off 3 shots in 8 seconds but the point is moot. The question is could Oswald aim and fire 3 shots with that gun and shot 2 being the kill shot at a moving target with trees in the way at times and to that I don't THINK (based on what i've read) he could have.

Again they have autumn in Dallas too.

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 12:28pm

Diogenes wrote: »

You mean the dozens of co workers who saw him in work that day, as well as the police officer who searched the building challenged Oswald and had his identity confirmed by his manager?

I'm not disputing he was in the building, but what do you think of the evidence that he was in the lunchroom at the time?

Diogenes wrote: »

Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK

Thanks but I've read that one! Is there any newer one you'd suggest?

King Mob · 01-05-2009 12:36pm

artvandulet wrote: »

I'm not disputing he was in the building, but what do you think of the evidence that he was in the lunchroom at the time?

Hang on, I'm pretty sure you did just that.

artvandulet wrote: »

But that still doesnt mean I think Oswald could shoot that rifle and do what he did with it! I'm not even sure he was there to begin with!

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 12:38pm

King Mob wrote: »

Hang on, I'm pretty sure you did just that.

I mean on the 6th floor, in the 'snipers perch'. should have been clearer. I apologise profusely!

Diogenes · 01-05-2009 12:48pm

artvandulet wrote: »

I'm not disputing he was in the building, but what do you think of the evidence that he was in the lunchroom at the time?

The evidence is one witness, giving the confusing nature of events its entirely possible they were wrong.

Thanks but I've read that one! Is there any newer one you'd suggest?

Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Hardcover)

By Vincent Bugliosi

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 1:17pm

Diogenes wrote: »

The evidence is one witness, giving the confusing nature of events its entirely possible they were wrong.

But there is plenty of other witnesses who's testimony suggestes he wasnt there(there being the snipers perch!).
Bonnie Ray Williams
Jack Dougherty
Officer Baker
Roy Truly

What about them?

Diogenes wrote: »

Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Hardcover)

By Vincent Bugliosi

Suprise suprise!:D

King Mob · 01-05-2009 1:28pm

artvandulet wrote: »

But there is plenty of other witnesses who's testimony suggestes he wasnt there(there being the snipers perch!).
Bonnie Ray Williams
Jack Dougherty
Officer Baker
Roy Truly

What about them?

Where all their testimonies consistent with each others?
I notice that you say "not in the snipers perch" rather than "in the lunchroom".

And can you provide links to these testimonies?

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 1:30pm

try the book I suggested earlier. It has a great chapter on it.

King Mob · 01-05-2009 1:36pm

artvandulet wrote: »

try the book I suggested earlier. It has a great chapter on it.

Unfortunately I don't have the time or cash to get this book.
Maybe you can just answer the question.

bog master · 01-05-2009 3:49pm

Diogenes wrote: »

Rubbish. He's a self proclaimed expert cited by kooks and idiots like Jim Fetzer.

If you believe him to be a world renowned expert on the secret service could you please explain how when you google "Vincent Palamara" the fourth link is to his Myspace page where he declares himself as a "SECRET SERVICE expert & guitarist".

This is not exactly the profile of someone who should be considered an expert in any field.

What he describes himself as makes no difference to me, I look at his published work and make my decision then.

And seeing in another post, you seem to recommend reading,Vincent Bugliosi............... here is an interesting quote. "Vince Bugliosi, famous Charles Manson prosecutor and author of "Helter Skelter" ansd "Outrage", has called me a "Secret Service expert" in his 2008 book "Four Days In November"!--- Vince Bugliosi letter to Vince Palamara dated 7/14/07:"I want you to know that I am very impressed with your research abilities and the enormous amount of work you put into your investigation of the Secret Service regarding the assassination. You are, unquestionably, the main authority on the Secret Service with regard to the assassination. I agree with you that they did not do a good job protecting the president (e.g. see p. 1443 of my

Again the quotes simply say "JFK was very co-operative with his agents". But the FACT remains that agents were not placed on the running boards of the presidential limo on several previous occasions.

Please read linked article again, agents speak of no interference, have never been asked to move off the car by Kennedy.

meglome · 01-05-2009 4:17pm

bog master wrote: »

Diogenes wrote: »

Rubbish. He's a self proclaimed expert cited by kooks and idiots like Jim Fetzer.

If you believe him to be a world renowned expert on the secret service could you please explain how when you google "Vincent Palamara" the fourth link is to his Myspace page where he declares himself as a "SECRET SERVICE expert & guitarist".

This is not exactly the profile of someone who should be considered an expert in any field.

What he describes himself as makes no difference to me, I look at his published work and make my decision then.

And seeing in another post, you seem to recommend reading,Vincent Bugliosi............... here is an interesting quote. "Vince Bugliosi, famous Charles Manson prosecutor and author of "Helter Skelter" ansd "Outrage", has called me a "Secret Service expert" in his 2008 book "Four Days In November"!--- Vince Bugliosi letter to Vince Palamara dated 7/14/07:"I want you to know that I am very impressed with your research abilities and the enormous amount of work you put into your investigation of the Secret Service regarding the assassination. You are, unquestionably, the main authority on the Secret Service with regard to the assassination. I agree with you that they did not do a good job protecting the president (e.g. see p. 1443 of my

Again the quotes simply say "JFK was very co-operative with his agents". But the FACT remains that agents were not placed on the running boards of the presidential limo on several previous occasions.

Please read linked article again, agents speak of no interference, have never been asked to move off the car by Kennedy.

Well JFK is dead so obviously the agents didn't do a sterling job. The point is it wasn't unusual for JFK to not have agents on the back of his car. It wasn't unusual for there to be no roof on the car, and besides the roof wasn't bulletproof anyway. So there was nothing unusual about the circumstances leading up the shooting.

The Discovery documentary shows that the head shot came from where the official accounts say it did, in the book depository. Since they used proper experimentation to come to that conclusion I'll take it over anyone who just says something else is true.

Does that prove as a fact that Oswald did it, no it doesn't. But it's yet more things that fit the official account. I can never quite understand why people have a problem thinking that a disillusioned loner with weapons might shoot someone important, I mean that never happens :rolleyes:

Diogenes · 01-05-2009 5:32pm

bog master wrote: »

Please read linked article again, agents speak of no interference, have never been asked to move off the car by Kennedy.

We're arguing at a cross purpose here, I'm not disputing Kennedy's relationship with his detail.

However the fact remains that Kennedy travelling in a open top convertible without agents on the presidential limo's running boards, was not in itself unusual, and was not a unique situation that occured only in Dallas on Nov 22.

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 6:07pm

King Mob wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have the time or cash to get this book.
Maybe you can just answer the question.

Then use your local library. Or look up the info online.

King Mob · 01-05-2009 6:15pm

artvandulet wrote: »

Then use your local library. Or look up the info online.

Or you could just answer yes or no.
Or provide a link.

You seem to know more about it.

Where all the testimonies claiming that Oswald was not where he was meant to be consistent with each other?

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 6:38pm

No not neccessarily. But it does add doubt in my mind.
Your quite bullish in your approach here aren't you. I mean you say you don't have the time yet you've plenty of time to post here.
Just do a search for TSBD witnesses or something. If I find a handy link I'll post it but there's lots of things about the whole case in general that just raise doubt for me on the lone gunman acting alone line and this was just one of them.
I used to have a lot of info to hand but as I said earlier its been quite a while since I've been interested in it.

artvandulet · 01-05-2009 6:41pm

Here's some reading on Oswalds actions at the time of shooting.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/the_critics/griffith/Where_was_Oswald.html
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PGchp8.html
http://www.book-of-thoth.com/archives-article-5381.html

Now I'm not saying that all of the above is gospel but it just adds to my doubts about Oswald.
Ok. I'm done with this thread!

King Mob · 01-05-2009 6:52pm

artvandulet wrote: »

No not neccessarily. But it does add doubt in my mind.

So they all place Oswald at completely different locations?

Why would you believe testimony if it doesn't agree with any other testimony?
Could these people not be mistaken? Wouldn't the fact that they don't agree with each other cast more doubt on them than the official story?

As meglome said there's no point looking at the big picture if the details don't add up.

Maybe you'd like to bring up some specific details that do add up toa conspiracy?

jonbravo · 02-05-2009 4:10am

King Mob wrote: »

So they all place Oswald at completely different locations?

Why would you believe testimony if it doesn't agree with any other testimony?
Could these people not be mistaken? Wouldn't the fact that they don't agree with each other cast more doubt on them than the official story?

As meglome said there's no point looking at the big picture if the details don't add up.

Maybe you'd like to bring up some specific details that do add up toa conspiracy?

oswald was part.........but he did not kill JFK....nor can history state so.

to kill so perfect is an art...oswald could not of done it.
there was more then one maybe 4 or 5.

JFK:Inside The Target Car - Discovery Channel UK 9pm tonight

Comments