Who shot JFK?

irishgeo

I was watching a documentary on this last night on discovery and they made some interesting points.

They were on about he warren commission and how hopeless it was?

There were lots of theories about how done it

it made interesting watching?

The narrowed it down to the following:
Oswald on his own not very likely, due to the front shot to the head.

Mob could have as the Oswald and they guy who shot had mob links and the Kennedy's were clamping down.

Castro as the US were trying to kill him.

Seem the video of where Kennedy got shot in the head. They only showed once or twice they bullet hitting is head but its very graphic and considering the yanks didn't get to see it for 9 years after the incident.

So any thoughts on this. i don't want mad theories just and general discussion.

***Spelling checked by IEspell what a great idea***

mike65

Only saw a few bits of it as I flicked around the channels, but as its on Discovery it'll be repeated sometime this week proberly. We'll never know what really happened at this stage with so many important figures now dead.

Unless Castro can tell us something...!

Allowing Jack Ruby to kill Lee Harvey Oswald was very clumsy.



Mike.

DaithiSurfer

Unless of course it was indeed Oswald who shot him on his own.
But then that doesn't help the mulder and scully fans around the place does it.

patch

You should watch JFK, Oliver Stones movie. All the facts he presents are true, at least up until he says what he believes happened.

The Warren Commission decided the damage was done by one bullet ( 'magic bullet' in later books, JFK had many bullet holes) Which went in and out of him in stupid ways, to support the lone gunman theories.

Somebody on the grassy knoll helped, most likely one or two of the tramps who were seen to be wearing nearly new black shoes.

elexes

i think it was 3 seperate orginsations who by fluke done it at same time

and they would be

the world modeling orginsation
the power puff girls
and finaly

london zoo

embee

Jesus..... I read that completely wrong and I thought it said ... Who shot JR?

Wasnt it Sue Ellens sister?

Sarky

No. It was me. With temporal mind bullets.

Did it show footage of Lee Harvey Oswald after he had been arrested?
I remember I saw a documentary a while back and he was claiming that he was (i forget the word he actually used) a scapegoat or something. And he sounded VERY believeable.


They've pretty much discovered that the head shot was taken from inside the sewer in front of his car, and from there the killer escaped down the relatively large network or tunnels for...about a mile i think it was, before getting away.


If you get shot in the back of the head, your head wont jerk backwards...


And NO, it wasn't cuba. American generals had plans to fake terrorist attacks in America in order to attack cuba, so what do you think they would have done if there was even the slightest hint that cuba had something to do with the presidents assasination.

DaithiSurfer

I saw that episode of X-files.
Sewers my arse .
and who are THEY who have discorvered this.
Huntley says he didn't kill those 2 girls in uk either.
Is he believable enough for you.
Or what about the the guy who murdered the woman and kid and priest in Galway.
I saw him on telly swearing he didnt do it.

DMT

Originally posted by utility_
I remember I saw a documentary a while back and he was claiming that he was (i forget the word he actually used) a scapegoat or something.

The word you're looking for is "patsy".

They've pretty much discovered that the head shot was taken from inside the sewer in front of his car, and from there the killer escaped down the relatively large network or tunnels for...about a mile i think it was, before getting away.

One of the worst episodes of the X-Files ever does not count as evidence....


Facts:

• The rifle that Oswald was supposed to have used can only recycle a minimum of every 2.3 seconds - the 2nd and 3rd shots where on top of each other - the Zapruder filmed established 2 shots in 5.6 seconds.
• The first two shots where blocked by an evergreen tree (a Texas Live Oak), which the J. Edgar Hoover claimed would have lost all its leaves.
• FBI sharp-shooters were unable to match Oswald's supposed performance.
• The FBI found no fingerprints on the rifle - they were found a week later by a someone in the Dallas police department.

Shoot a moving target through heavy foliage at 88 yards - Oswald couln't do it.

That doesn't mean that Oswald, a man who "defected" to Russia but was never charged with being a traitor on his return, wasn't involved in some way - it would explain his "patsy" comment....

Originally posted by DMT

One of the worst episodes of the X-Files ever does not count as evidence....

Ok that was actually a silly comment for me to make, however I must elaborate. I was watching a documentary and they were loading all of the info they had into a computer which was able to analise the path of the bullets etc and that headshot just happened to come exactly from the directeion of a drain slot in the curb some feet in front of the car. Then they got a guy down into it with a rifle to show what a clear shot the assasin could have had, and how he could have escaped.


end of *theory*.

ALLGOOD

FACT OF THE MATTER IS THE C.I.A. TOPPED HIM, THEY LIKE TO DO THAT EVERY NOW AND AGAIN TO KEEP EVERYTHING IN ORDER (MARTIN LUTHER KING / JOHN LENNON / GANDHI)

THE ASSAINS WERE AIDED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE THE C.I.A. BUT WHO HAVE NO CONNECTION TO THE C.I.A.

YOU KNOW, THAT MASTER OF PUPPETS TYPE THING.

gobby

i read a book on the CIA using mind control recently. i think it was the CIA that did it. not the CIA that we all know and love but an underground version of it who basically pull the strings of the US. the author of the book described this underground as the crypocracy.

gobby

sorry, *cryptocracy

DaithiSurfer

I've heard numerous different theories and there are people willing to believe every one of them, but those people will entertain ideas of people being in sewers, on grassy knolls etc, but not that Oswald was possibly a good marksman or that he had 3 fluke shots or maybe just one fluke shot and 2 good ones etc etc.
Maybe if he tried again he couldnt do it but it only took once.
Nobody here knows that Oswald was not able to make all of those shots. I hit 15 out of 15 clay pigeons last week and never picked up a shotgun in my life before (severel i dont know how i hit them i just pulled the trigger when i thought i'ld lost it).
There were 10 other people there most of them had been shooting for years. Nobody else hit all 15, in fact only 1 got more than 10.

If i was planning to assasinate someone and bought the gun a few weeks before i'ld be practisibg every day.
Or Maybe thats what he was doing when he was in Cuba?

Fact: Trees lose their leaves in the winter.

Fact: The rifle used could be recycled and aimed in time for every shot, its just that the conspiracey theorists have spread this one so far and wide that everyone believes it. You'll even get more sites saying this than truthful ones at this stage (like the moon landings and the shadows etc)

Fact: Security agencies and police are just guys doing a job and you have lazy and crap guys just like in any job. When something big happens this is shown up even though they were probably always incompetent. You only have to look at the guards here to see that.


Once there is soemthing to say against the CIA or similar the theorists will be out in force.
Even if one of them dies in a car crash after writing an article then the CIA murdered them according to the rest and adds more fuel to the fire.

I mean read the post about the mind control and secret other CIA and stuff.
Where's the proof that these guys exist? And don't say its from a book by another plank of a theorist.


Maybe a spade is just a spade.

Barry Aldwell

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
Nobody here knows that Oswald was not able to make all of those shots. I hit 15 out of 15 clay pigeons last week and never picked up a shotgun in my life before (severel i dont know how i hit them i just pulled the trigger when i thought i'ld lost it)

Yes, but you were using a shotgun, which disperses small buckshot over a relatively large target area, increasing the likelihood of hitting something. Try using a rifle, and all you'll end up with is some wasted ammo, buttles falling a few miles away, and some solid targets. Firing a shotgun at a white target set against a blue sky and firing a rifle at a moving target 88 yards away are quite different. In addition, recocking the rifle after every shot (the weapon was bolt action) would require either for Mr Oswald to remove his right hand from the trigger to operate the bolt, which makes it impossible to keep the rifle on target (unless using a tripod), or for him to shift the entire rifle so that he could operate it with his left hand. Either way, he could not have kept aiming at JFK, and he would have had to reacquire his target after every shot, which takes time. While I am not saying that hitting Kennedy twice in 5.6 seconds is impossible, it would be hard. But then again, Mr Oswald was a marine, and the marines have the finest sharpshooting corps of any regular force. However, his lack of discipline, and the fact that he shot JFK in the first place, indicates that he did not fully absorb some of the basic ideas taught in the marines, namely that they are not there to shoot the president, but to protect the country that he runs. Ah well, he's dead, so we'll never know.

DMT

I found a website that uses computer 3D modelling to prove the magic bullet theory, which doesn't appear to be so magic after all. ==> www.jfkfiles.com

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
Fact: Trees lose their leaves in the winter.

Whatever about the rest, don't tell me you've never heard of an evergreen tree! - that's not a bush you stick your decorations on at Christmas...

Proof!!!!:



That picture was taken earlier this evening from a webcam postioned at the 6th floor window of the book depository.
[bad sarcasm]Those green things on the tree are called leaves.[/bad sarcasm]

sceptre

Originally posted by DMT
That picture was taken earlier this evening from a webcam postioned at the 6th floor window of the book depository.

Friggin hell, there's a webcam there?

Anyone wanna do a quick Flash game based on the above with a slow moving car?

DapperGent

I think that in Red Dwarf JFK went back in time and shot himself from the grassy knoll to prevent a nuclear holocaust.

Then he faded away. It was very sad. I think Lister was quite fond of him.

bus77

One of the police said that while everyone else was standin around or movin towards the area he saw 2 fellas speed walkin away dressed in workmens gear. The thing he thought was strange was that instead of boots they had clean leather shoes.
Not conclusive proof:D but it stuck in my mind anyway.

Ya have to remember those times. People were building bomb shelters in their gardens, a spanish inquisition type thing( The McCarthy Hearings)

A group of people gettin together to remove the Cuban threat by whatever meens nessisary goes without saying. They would call themselves patriots.

DaithiSurfer

The picture proves nothing.
If you look at the actual video taken by the warren commission, the tree was an oak tree (not evergreen just so you know) and also 40 years ago was much smaller than the photo shown above. You could still see kennedies double for the experiment through the leaves on theday the video was shot (june i think) there just wasn't a 'clear' shot.
Also the quality of that photo above is worse than the ones from the kennedy shooting.

This just goes to show though what people are willing to believe without actually trying to find out some hard evidence. Just goes to prove my point.

The point about the shotgun was not that it was a shotgun, it was that i got VERY lucky. Could happen with a rifle and 3 bullets with an expert marksman too is my point.

The washington sniper was an ex-marine too. Maybe he was out of class on the hop with oswald on the days where they told them not to shoot people like the pres and civilians.

Bicky

Does it seem likely that if it had been a government body they would have shot him with a sniper rifle on front of a large crowd?
I really dont know.

DMT

The big problem is ths most of the "evidence" that people cite is from Oliver Stone's film JFK, a film trhat contains many inaccuracies.

For instance:

• The character "Willie O'Keefe" that appears in the film never existed.
• It shows Jim Garrison doing most of the cross-examinations at the Clay Shaw trial - in reality, he wasn't even present when Clay Shaw was being cross-examined.
• The gay orgy scene - that came straight out of Oliver Stone's imagination.
• Oliver Stone couldn't find a modern rifle capable of producing smoke that could be seen on the grassy knoll and had to get get SFX guys to blow it in the air with a bellow. Why would assassins uses 19th century rifles that create huge puffs of smoke?

There's more here: http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100menu.html

DMT

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
The picture proves nothing.

It proves that in November there are trees with leaves on them, which you said couldn't happen - so there!!!!

irishgeo

jeez i didn't think i start this sort of argument. The only way to figure out where he was shot is to get the x-rays and post Morten from the kennedy's and then that should remove some confusion about it.

Don't believe the magic bullet theory. Find impossible to believe that Oswald acted alone. Bit of a strange that he got shot and didn't have to face trial which would require some evidence.

DaithiSurfer

Originally posted by DMT
It proves that in November there are trees with leaves on them, which you said couldn't happen - so there!!!!

You're right, I'll give you that one.
Now we'l have to go back to the photos from 63 to see if there were leaves on the tree that day.
We'll even check to see if it was windy so the leaves were still or not

I'm not trying to say that Oswald definitely acted alone at all.

What i am trying to say is that there is no hard evidence to support anything else even though it possibly could have another explanation (anything could).
Its all made up and swallowed by conspiracy theorists who make a living out of exploiting peoples hatred for secure organisations.
Then weak minded peolpe agree with them without having thought about it or checked out some of the wild theories.

Those people are more inclined to believe what they want to believe and will not question what they believe is the truth.

Ido think the warren commission was a joke though.
They set out to prove there was only one gunman and tried to prove all other theories were rubbish.
This was not the way they should have done iit. They should have started with a blank sheet and no theories if they wanted to be fair. This doent mean what they ended up with was a cover up tho.

DMT

Originally posted by DMT
Facts:

• The rifle that Oswald was supposed to have used can only recycle a minimum of every 2.3 seconds - the 2nd and 3rd shots where on top of each other - the Zapruder filmed established 2 shots in 5.6 seconds.
• The first two shots where blocked by an evergreen tree (a Texas Live Oak), which the J. Edgar Hoover claimed would have lost all its leaves.
• FBI sharp-shooters were unable to match Oswald's supposed performance.
• The FBI found no fingerprints on the rifle - they were found a week later by a someone in the Dallas police department.

You're an idiot*. Those so-called facts are just completely inaccurate bullshit gleamed from Oliver Stone's film. Do some proper research before spouting off crap...








* Hang on a second....

DaithiSurfer

i love it

Barry Aldwell

With all this talk of Earl Warren, I believe it's time for the inevitable quote:

"Do you want your son to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, or some sleazy stripper?"

"Can't he be both, like the late Earl Warren?"

"Earl Warren wasn't a stripper!"

"Now who's being naieve?"

Oh, and the film was exactly that. A film. Not a documentary.

Giblet

Actually It was very easy to get that many shots off.

It wasn't "three shots in blah blah time"
It was two, counting from the first shot.

DMT

Originally posted by Giblet
Actually It was very easy to get that many shots off.

It wasn't "three shots in blah blah time"
It was two, counting from the first shot.

*bangs head off wall**

Giblet

Oh it seems you didn't understand, thats ok,

1 shot. start counting.
2nd shot,
3rd shot.

Thats two shots in 5.6 seconds, hardly the feat of a super man, just someone who knows how to reload the f*cking gun.

DMT

Originally posted by Giblet
Oh it seems you didn't understand,

No, I did, ergo the head-banging....

monument

An interactive guide, which includes the conspiracy theories...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,5860,1070564,00.html

Giblet

Originally posted by DMT
No, I did, ergo the head-banging....

Would you care to explain, maybe backed up with some more sh*t talk, I mean, interweb facts. :rolleyes:

DMT

Originally posted by Giblet
Would you care to explain, maybe backed up with some more sh*t talk, I mean, interweb facts. :rolleyes:

The head-banging was me not copping on that it's not 2.3 seconds for each shot, but instead realising, as you said, that the 1st shot counts at being at time zero.

How you're interpreting it as something else is beyond my comprehension.....

It appears I've entered the twilight zone....

monument

Originally posted by DMT
How you're interpreting it as something else is beyond my comprehension.....

It really did look as if the head banging was questioning what he had said.

Apparently, the US House of Representatives select committee on assassinations said there were probably two gunmen, but Oswald fired the fatal shots.

Giblet

It sure as hell seemed that way

Oswald Osbourne

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
Unless of course it was indeed Oswald who shot him on his own.

Look, for the last time - I wasn't even IN Dallas on 22/11/63!!!!

Kidding aside I certainly don't buy into the single shooter theory. I reckon there must have been two shooters judging by the trajectories, timing and number of bullets fired. As to the whys I sooner be suspecting the Texas oilbarons (who more or less run the country anyway) than the mafia or the cubans. No coincidence it happened in Texas IMHO!

whosurpaddy

theres another program on this subject, next sunday. bbc 1 i think

DaithiSurfer

JFK is in telly as well
Net2 i think

whosurpaddy

when is this on?, jfk (the film) would make a nice ending to my rapidly expanding jfk tape.

DaithiSurfer

It would want to be a big tape.
that movie is 3.5 hours long with the adds.

I think its saturday at 9pm on Net 2

whosurpaddy

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer
that movie is 3.5 hours long with the adds.

:eek:

cheers for the times