Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

jfk taken out by mob??? **Contains Graphic Images**

Options
1235718

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    The Aleya film taken minutes after the assassination clearly shows the Dallas PD recovering the Mannlicher-Carcano from it's hiding place among the book cartons:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=249DTnfrKMo

    I already posted a photo of a detective carrying the same rifle out of the building:

    clpmybe.jpg

    There is no doubt whatsoever that the rifle recovered from the TSBD was a Mannlicher Carcano 6.5mm bolt action rifle.

    expensive-rifle-kennedy.jpg

    This is another picture of the weapon.
    It was not a Mauser.
    It is a Mannlicher-Carcano.

    Hmm this evidence is a little odd and I would hope it's correct as that would clear something up for me that bugged after reading a couple of books on the assignation and Nixon. One point that is mentioned is the discrepancy regarding the rifles:
    The below is all relevant but I've highlighted the most pertinent issue
    pages 98 & 99
    A great deal of confusion surrounded this second-rate Italian rifle because there was compelling evidence that it was not the weapon found in the assassin's lair shortly after the assassination. Officer Seymour Weitzman, part of the Dallas police search team, later described the discovery of the rifle on the afternoon of November 22. He stated that it had been so well hidden under boxes of books that the officers stumbled over it many times before they found it. Officer Weitzman, who had an engineering degree and also operated a sporting goods store, was recognized as an authority on weapons. Consequently, Dallas Homicide Chief Will Fritz, who was on the scene, asked him the make of the rifle. Weitzman identified it as a 7.65 Mauser, a highly accurate German-made weapon. Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig was also there and later recalled the word "Mauser" inscribed in the metal of the gun. And Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone executed a sworn affidavit in which he described the rifle as a Mauser. As late as midnight of November 22, Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade told the media that the weapon found was a Mauser.
    There is, of course, a significant difference between a first-class Mauser and a cheap mail-order Mannlicher-Carcano. It should have been simple to know which weapon had been found. However, to complicate the issue, three empty cartridges from a Mannlicher-Carcano were found in the same room as the Mauser. They were near the easternmost sixth-floor window, close together and almost parallel to each other. Although this arrangement made them easy to find, it defied what any experienced user of rifles knows: that when a rifle is fired, the cartridge is flung violently away. A neat distribution pattern of cartridges like the one found on the sixth floor of the Depository is virtually impossible. It strongly suggested to me that the cartridges were never fired from the assassin's lair but were planted near the window, presumably having been fired earlier elsewhere, so that bullet fragments found in the President's limousine could be described as having come from the Carcano.
    There were other problems with the story that the Mannlicher-Carcano had been the murder weapon. For instance, no ammunition clip was ever found. The clip is the device that feeds the cartridges into the rifle's firing chamber. Without such a clip, the cartridges have to be loaded by hand, making fast shooting such as Oswald was alleged to have done impossible. The Warren Commission skirted this problem by never confronting that fact.
    Complicating the matter even further, the Mannlicher-Carcano triumphantly produced as the "assassin's rifle" was found to have a badly misaligned sight. So badly was the sight out of line with the barrel that an adjustment was necessary before government riflemen could complete their test firing. Even so, no rifle expert was ever able to duplicate the feat the government attributed to Lee Oswald.
    Despite these problems, when the smoke cleared and all the law enforcement authorities in Dallas had their stories duly in order, the official position was that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository was the Mannlicher-Carcano, which allegedly was linked to Oswald under an alias, and not the Mauser, which disappeared forever shortly after it reached the hands of Captain Fritz.
    But even this revision of the official story did not explain the third rifle. A film taken by Dallas Cinema Associates, an independent film company, showed a scene of the Book Depository shortly after the assassination. Police officers on the fire escape were bringing down a rifle from the roof above the sixth floor with the tender care you might give an infant. When the policemen reached the ground, a high-ranking officer held the rifle high for everyone to see. The camera zoomed in for a close-up. Beneath the picture was the legend, "The Assassin's Rifle." When I saw the film, I noted that this rifle had no sight mounted on it. Thus it could not have been either the Carcano or the vanished Mauser, both of which had sights.
    I was not surprised to find that this third rifle, like the Mauser, had disappeared. But its existence confirmed my hypothesis that Lee Oswald could not have killed John Kennedy as the American public had been told. Setting aside the evidence of two other weapons on the scene, the incredibly accurate shooting of an incredibly inaccurate rifle within an impossible time frame was merely the beginning of the feat we were asked to believe Oswald had accomplished.

    But your picture shows a sight mounted very clearly - how could Garrison have missed the sight? It's huge and clear or am I missing something?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭Joshua Jones


    The Aleya film taken minutes after the assassination clearly shows the Dallas PD recovering the Mannlicher-Carcano from it's hiding place among the book cartons:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=249DTnfrKMo

    I already posted a photo of a detective carrying the same rifle out of the building:

    clpmybe.jpg

    There is no doubt whatsoever that the rifle recovered from the TSBD was a Mannlicher Carcano 6.5mm bolt action rifle.

    expensive-rifle-kennedy.jpg

    This is another picture of the weapon.
    It was not a Mauser.
    It is a Mannlicher-Carcano.

    Yes. Two nice pictures of a Mannlicher-Carcano. The gun found in the depository was a Mauser 7.65 though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,461 ✭✭✭foxshooter243




  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    Have a few points to make re rifle and casings found, some of which perhaps has been mentioned apologies if so.

    Tom Alyea claims he filmed much of the search, and Fritz took the shell casings and put them in his pocket. When Detective Studebaker arrived to photograph the "crime scene", he was handed the shells and tossed them on the floor before photographing them. So a re-creation, WHY?

    Boone one of those who supposedly found the rifle signed an affadavitt that it was a Mauser. Weitzman in a signed statement claims it was a Mauser. District Attorney Wade in a news conference described it as a Mauser.
    But yet in keeping with all of the contradictions in this case from start to finish, Alyea also claims Boone was not there when the rifle was found. F


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    tallus wrote: »
    I don't know if it's fake, all I have is your word.

    So you're ignoring the fact that several of the doctors present in parkland memorial spoke about the size of the wound in the link I supplied earlier.
    Also, I'll reiterate my comment that the picture you posted has no merit in relation to what we're discussing here as it's impossible to tell what kind of wound was there originally (entry or exit) as the original wound has been altered due to the medical procedure carried out in an effort to revive the president.
    I'm kind of stuck in work at the moment so I don't have time to reply in detail so maybe later on I'll post a bit more.
    tallus wrote: »
    I don't know if it's fake, all I have is your word.

    So you're ignoring the fact that several of the doctors present in parkland memorial spoke about the size of the wound in the link I supplied earlier.
    Also, I'll reiterate my comment that the picture you posted has no merit in relation to what we're discussing here as it's impossible to tell what kind of wound was there originally (entry or exit) as the original wound has been altered due to the medical procedure carried out in an effort to revive the president.
    I'm kind of stuck in work at the moment so I don't have time to reply in detail so maybe later on I'll post a bit more.

    I dont know how we can really trust the autopsy photos or even the x-rays at this stage.

    Floyd Reibe, the assistant photpgrapher has testified some of the pictures
    at the autopsy attributed to him, HE DID NOT TAKE

    The photos were developed at Anacostia Naval StationLab, rather than at Bethesda. WHY

    The total number of pictures both colour and b&w are are odds with the inventory. Some of the b&w are copies of the colour ones.

    Humes and Boswell both say photographs they remember direction
    photographers to take are MISSING even tho they signed a statement in 1966 to the opposite.

    John Stringer, the head photographer testified some of the shots of the brain taken at the Supplementary Autopsy Report were NOT TAKEN BY HIM.

    Why are there no closeups of the Back/Neck wound?

    Why are there no ID Tags in the photos?

    It goes on and on and on!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭jurgenscarl


    Yes. Two nice pictures of a Mannlicher-Carcano. The gun found in the depository was a Mauser 7.65 though.

    Even though I just shown you clear evidence that the rifle was a Mannlicher Carcano, you still persist with your claim that the rifle was a Mauser.

    You are in total denial.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭Joshua Jones


    Even though I just shown you clear evidence that the rifle was a Mannlicher Carcano, you still persist with your claim that the rifle was a Mauser.

    You are in total denial.

    Whats the terminology when someone accuses someone else of being in the state that the accuser feels?. I can't quite think of it..............


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    Even though I just shown you clear evidence that the rifle was a Mannlicher Carcano, you still persist with your claim that the rifle was a Mauser.

    You are in total denial.

    I respectfully disagree you have shown clear evidence! Can we discount Tom Alyea claims, Wieitzman signed statement it was a Mauser, Boone's affadavitt it was a Mauser, Roger Craig's statements, and District Attorney's Press Conference near midnight of 22/11/63 that it was a Mauser!

    As I state again and again, why are there so many many discrepancises in almost every aspect of this case?

    And, am jurgenscarl, am still awaiting your response when I stated the autopsy was flawed in the very least, and presented various aspects of the autopsy which I feel were flawed. Do you still stand by the autopsy was conducted in a fully professional and thorough way according to standards of the time?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    Even though I just shown you clear evidence that the rifle was a Mannlicher Carcano, you still persist with your claim that the rifle was a Mauser.

    You are in total denial.

    I think an a sworn affadavit to the contrary at least give him the right to doubt your/official i.e revised official version. Apparently 3 rifles were found altogether? 3 rifles one shooter? no.


  • Registered Users Posts: 56 ✭✭xyz123


    Tom Alyea's own footage of the discovery of the rifle shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher- Carcano as do photos of the rifle in place

    This is Weitzmans testimony to the Commission

    Mr. BALL. In the statement that you made to the Dallas Police Department that afternoon, you referred to the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser bolt action?

    Mr. WEITZMAN. In a glance, that's what it looked like.

    Mr. BALL. That's what it looked like did you say that or someone else say that?

    Mr. WEITZMAN. No; I said that. I thought it was one .

    . . .

    Mr. BALL. I understand that. Now, in your statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, you gave a description of the rifle, how it looked.

    Mr. WEITZMAN. I said it was a Mauser-type action, didn't I?

    Mr. BALL. Mauser bolt action.

    Mr. WEITZMAN. And at the time I looked at it, I believe I said it was 2.5 scope on it and I believe I said it was a Weaver but it wasn't; it turned out to be anything but a Weaver, but that was at a glance ).

    This is Boones evidence

    Mr. BOONE. Yes, I did. And at first, not knowing what it was, I thought it was 7.65 Mauser.

    Mr. BALL. Who referred to it as a Mauser that day?

    Mr. BOONE. I believe Captain Fritz


    This is Craigs story to the LA free press in 1968

    FP: Did you handle that rifle?
    RC: Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles, I know it was foreign made, and you loaded it downward into a built-in clip. The ID man took it and ejected one live round from it. The scope was facing north, the bolt facing upwards and the trigger south.

    But there was another rifle, a Mauser, found up on the roof of the depository that afternoon.

    This is his subsequent story

    "Lt. Day inspected the rifle briefly, then handed it to Capt. Fritz who had a puzzled look on his face. Seymour Weitzman, a deputy constable, was standing beside me at the time. Weitzman was an expert on weapons. He had been in the sporting goods business for many years and was familiar with all domestic and foreign weapons. Capt. Fritz asked if anyone knew what kind of rifle it was. Weitzman asked to see it. After a close examination (much longer than Fritz or Day's examination) Weitzman declared that it was a 7.65 German Mauser. Fritz agreed with him"


    So the stories of all of these witnesses of the rifle is inconsistent, except for the actual pictures of the discovery of the rifle which show that it wasnt a Mauser.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,324 ✭✭✭tallus


    xyz123 wrote: »
    Tom Alyea's own footage of the discovery of the rifle shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher- Carcano as do photos of the rifle in place

    This is Weitzmans testimony to the Commission

    Mr. BALL. In the statement that you made to the Dallas Police Department that afternoon, you referred to the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser bolt action?

    Mr. WEITZMAN. In a glance, that's what it looked like.

    Mr. BALL. That's what it looked like did you say that or someone else say that?

    Mr. WEITZMAN. No; I said that. I thought it was one .

    . . .

    Mr. BALL. I understand that. Now, in your statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, you gave a description of the rifle, how it looked.

    Mr. WEITZMAN. I said it was a Mauser-type action, didn't I?

    Mr. BALL. Mauser bolt action.

    Mr. WEITZMAN. And at the time I looked at it, I believe I said it was 2.5 scope on it and I believe I said it was a Weaver but it wasn't; it turned out to be anything but a Weaver, but that was at a glance ).

    This is Boones evidence

    Mr. BOONE. Yes, I did. And at first, not knowing what it was, I thought it was 7.65 Mauser.

    Mr. BALL. Who referred to it as a Mauser that day?

    Mr. BOONE. I believe Captain Fritz


    This is Craigs story to the LA free press in 1968

    FP: Did you handle that rifle?
    RC: Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles, I know it was foreign made, and you loaded it downward into a built-in clip. The ID man took it and ejected one live round from it. The scope was facing north, the bolt facing upwards and the trigger south.

    But there was another rifle, a Mauser, found up on the roof of the depository that afternoon.

    This is his subsequent story

    "Lt. Day inspected the rifle briefly, then handed it to Capt. Fritz who had a puzzled look on his face. Seymour Weitzman, a deputy constable, was astanding beside me at the time. Weitzman was an expert on weapons. He had been in the sporting goods business for many years and was familiar with all domestic and foreign weapons. Capt. Fritz asked if anyone knew what kind of rifle it was. Weitzman asked to see it. After a close examination (much longer than Fritz or Day's examination) Weitzman declared that it was a 7.65 German Mauser. Fritz agreed with him"


    So the stories of all of these witnesses of the rifle is inconsistent, except for the actual pictures of the discovery of the rifle which show that it wasnt a Mauser.

    Sorry for going off topic here but one post since joining in May 2005! Has to be a record :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 56 ✭✭xyz123


    you've no idea how long it took to recover user names and passwords:D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭jurgenscarl


    Do you still stand by the autopsy was conducted in a fully professional and thorough way according to standards of the time?

    Completely irrelevant.

    The Warren Commission, The Rockerfeller Commission, The US House Select Committee on Assassinations and Ramsey Clarke Panel all examined the physical evidence thoroughly and came to same conclusions.

    Oswald acted alone, fired three shots killing JFK and wounding Governor Connally.

    The physical evidence that Oswald fired the shots is absolutely overwhelming.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,324 ✭✭✭tallus


    Oswald acted alone, fired three shots killing JFK and wounding Governor Connally.
    The physical evidence that Oswald fired the shots is absolutely overwhelming.

    Quote from one of my earlier posts regarding a Oswald practicing at the shooting range.
    Before the Warren Commission:

    Q. Did you fire with Oswald?

    DELGADO. Right; I was in the same line. By that I mean we were on line together, the same time, but not firing at the same position, but at the same time, and I remember seeing his [shooting]. It was a pretty big joke, because he got a lot of "Maggie's drawers," you know, a lot of misses, but he didn't give a darn.

    Q. Missed the target completely?

    DELGADO. He just qualified, that's it. He wasn't as enthusiastic as the rest of us. We all loved--liked, you know going to the range. (8 H 235)

    In a filmed interview with attorney Mark Lane:

    Oswald couldn't shoot for ****. If you had read the earlier posts between myself and diogenes you would have seen that.
    No rifleman no matter how skilled has been able to repeat that shooting feat, and you expect us to believe that a shooter who had problems hitting static targets on a shooting range was able to get three rounds off and hit two of them home. ?
    There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, if you look for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    Completely irrelevant.

    So now the autopsy report which I have shown to be poorly done, with 2 of the three pathologists with minimal experience in gunshot wounds,which did not follow standard procedures, and created more questions that it answered,is not relevant?

    The evidence is the clicher in this case.
    The autopsy report, autopsy photographs and the testimony of the autopsy doctors is conclusive.
    And yet I quote you above from one of your previous posts.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭jurgenscarl


    bog master wrote: »

    So now the autopsy report which I have shown to be poorly done, with 2 of the three pathologists with minimal experience in gunshot wounds,which did not follow standard procedures, and created more questions that it answered,is not relevant?


    And yet I quote you above from one of your previous posts.

    The evidence in the autopsy report, the photographs and the testimony of the pathologists is conclusive.

    Whether the autopsy was done correctly or incorrectly is irrelevant.

    4 official investigations thoroughly analysed the physical evidence and all came to the same conclusion that Oswald acted alone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭uncleoswald


    tallus wrote: »
    Oswald couldn't shoot for ****. If you had read the earlier posts between myself and diogenes you would have seen that.
    Yeah I read that and came to the conclusion that while not as capable as some other Marines, Oswald was still a Marine standard shot. How did you come to the conclusion that he "couldn't shoot for ****"?
    you expect us to believe that a shooter who had problems hitting static targets on a shooting range was able to get three rounds off and hit two of them home. ?
    He got the 2nd classification out of 3. I find it hard to believe that the Marines hand out these qualifications lightly, in fact Oswald twice achieved a score of 48 & 49 out of 50 in a rapid fire test which is well in the range of the highest qualification. So you are been a bit misleading to say he "had problems" hitting targets. Sounds to me like a skilled marksman who had trouble focusing those skills.

    No rifleman no matter how skilled has been able to repeat that shooting feat
    But as has been pointed out they were trying to do it with the wrong time span. It has been done many times with what is now considered to be the correct one. If you have a problem with the Penn and Teller recreation, or how the current time span is calculated, could you tell us what it is?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭jurgenscarl


    I'll list the evidence against Oswald that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he was guilty of killing the President and JD Tippet

    1. He owned the Mannlicher Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and was ballistically matched to the CE399 bullet found on Connally's stretcer and the bullet fragments found in the limousine.
    The order form was filled out in his handwriting using his habitual pseudonym 'A. Hidell.' A forged ID found on Oswald had the same fictional name.

    2. He owned the .38 handgun used to shoot a Officer JD Tippet and was carrying the same type of ammunition in his pockets when he was arrested in the Texas Theatre - he also attempted to draw and fire the gun during the struggle with police.

    3. Howard Brennan positively identified Oswald as the person he saw firing a rifle from the 6th floor window and the description circulated on the police radio net matches the description of the man numerous witnesses saw shooting Tippet to death. Tippet most likely stopped Oswald because he matched the description he must have heard on the radio net.

    4. Marina Oswald testified that she took the backyard photos that show Oswald brandishing his rifle and handgun and she also testified that Oswald admitted to her that he attempted to kill General Walker. The bullet recovered after the Walker assassination attempt was the same type of bullet used in the JFK murder. The attempt to kill Walker was made only days after he recieved the rifle by mail order.

    5. Buell Frazier who gave him a ride to work that morning testified that Oswald took a long brown paper package to work and last saw him taking it into the TSBD. The brown paper packaging was found in the 6th floor sniper nest. Oswald claimed the package contained curtain rods. No curtain rods were ever found and his room at the boarding house did not need curtains or curtain rods. Oswald kept his rifle in Ruth Paine's garage and made his unusual trip to the residence the day before the assassination. When the garage was searched by police the rifle was found to be missing from the blanket it was usually rolled in.

    6. Oswald was last seen prior to assassination on the 6th floor of the TSBD by his co-workers who went down to watch the motorcade.

    7. Oswald's palmprint was lifted from the dissembled barrel of the rifle after the shooting. Fibres from his work shirt were found in the crevice between the wooden buttstock and metal butt plate.

    8. The majority of the Dealey Plaza witnesses testified that they heard three shots and that the shots came from the direction of the TSBD. All of the news reporters who were in the motorcade heard three shots and this was reported around the world within minutes of the shooting.
    It has been proven time and again in simulated tests that three shots could have been fired with two hits on a target in less than 6 secs and at the range of less than 90 yards using the rifle and that Oswald's Marine training shows he had the ability to do it.

    9. After the shooting the TSBD employees were assembled for questioning by police and Oswald was found to be the only employee absent.

    10. It was also proven that Oswald could have indeed travelled, in 90 seconds or less, the distance across the sixth floor of the TSBD and descended the floor flights of stairs in time to have been seen by policeman Marrion L. Baker on the building's second floor.

    11.Lee has the taxi driver, William Whaley,take him NOT to the front door of 1026 N. Beckley (LHO's residence) -- but instead to a point three blocks BEYOND his home. He actually passes his house first in the cab, which, IMO, is an obvious attempt to see if any cops are waiting for him there yet, and so that the cab driver won't know exactly where his passenger lives.Oswald then grabs a handgun at his home, puts on a jacket (to conceal the weapon more easily), and hustles out of the roominghouse, not saying a word to housekeeper Earlene Roberts (who noted his hurried behavior).

    12.When questioned by the police, Lee Harvey tells one lie after another regarding crucial information -- such as lying after being asked each of the following questions: "Do you own a rifle?", "Who is A.J. Hidell?", and "Did you bring a package to work this morning?".

    13. All the physical evidence shows that Kennedy was struck in the back of the neck and back of the head by bullets fired from Oswald's rifle from the direction of the 6th floor south east corner window.

    CASE CLOSED.


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    bog master wrote: »

    So now the autopsy report which I have shown to be poorly done, with 2 of the three pathologists with minimal experience in gunshot wounds,which did not follow standard procedures, and created more questions that it answered,is not relevant?




    The evidence in the autopsy report, the photographs and the testimony of the pathologists is conclusive.

    Whether the autopsy was done correctly or incorrectly is irrelevant.

    4 official investigations thoroughly analysed the physical evidence and all came to the same conclusion that Oswald acted alone.
    Because in my view and many others, those who are experts unlike this poor follower of this controversey; the Autopsy was poorly done, did not follow proper procedures, and created more questions than it answered, and therefore any conclusions from the autopsy must be taken with a grain of salt.

    And yes 4 investigations were held, set up by who? The government.
    The government or various adminastrations rather, that denied the CIA ever operated an assinanation policy of foreign leaders and politicians, that denied the US bombing of Cambodia, and told the world there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Closer to home, a government set up the Widgery Report. And right at home, do you believe our government saying NAMA wont cost any of us a penny?

    Having said that re: the investigations, each one provided a bit more evidence, which is positive. I try to keep an open mind, look at the evidence and form an opinion, and happily will admit when a point I raise, or someone I quote is proven wrong or impossible. But looking at the complete picture, there is almost no aspect which is black and white, almost every single facet seems to be clouded in controversey and has differring witness accounts or scientific experts disagreeing.

    If there was one or two aspects of the case with questions raised, I would accept the majority of the other evidence and go with the official reports.
    However, there is nothing in this case that is black and white.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭jurgenscarl


    bog master wrote: »
    bog master wrote: »
    Because in my view and many others, those who are experts unlike this poor follower of this controversey; the Autopsy was poorly done, did not follow proper procedures, and created more questions than it answered, and therefore any conclusions from the autopsy must be taken with a grain of salt.

    And yes 4 investigations were held, set up by who? The government.
    The government or various adminastrations rather, that denied the CIA ever operated an assinanation policy of foreign leaders and politicians, that denied the US bombing of Cambodia, and told the world there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Closer to home, a government set up the Widgery Report. And right at home, do you believe our government saying NAMA wont cost any of us a penny?

    Having said that re: the investigations, each one provided a bit more evidence, which is positive. I try to keep an open mind, look at the evidence and form an opinion, and happily will admit when a point I raise, or someone I quote is proven wrong or impossible. But looking at the complete picture, there is almost no aspect which is black and white, almost every single facet seems to be clouded in controversey and has differring witness accounts or scientific experts disagreeing.

    If there was one or two aspects of the case with questions raised, I would accept the majority of the other evidence and go with the official reports.
    However, there is nothing in this case that is black and white.

    I have just outlined clear irrefutable evidence.
    There is absolutely nothing that can be disputed.
    If this was presented in a court of law Oswald would have been found guilty.
    Indeed Vincent Bugliosi conducted a mock trial on British television in the 1980's and the jury found Oswald guilty.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,247 ✭✭✭stevejazzx


    4 official investigations thoroughly analysed the physical evidence and all came to the same conclusion that Oswald acted alone
    You are in total denial.

    This is incorrect
    The house of assination concludes that oswald did not act alone.

    The Committee further concluded that it was probable that:
    • four shots were fired
    • the third shot came from a second assassin located on the grassy knoll, but missed. They concluded that it missed due to the lack of physical evidence of an actual bullet, of course this investigation took place almost sixteen years after the crime.
    What you've got to remember is for an established elected committee to even suggest an conspiracy is a pretty big thing as the pressure on them to find with the original story was immense. What seems to have happened is that some of the evidence (specifically that which contradicted Oswald as a lone assassin) was to strong that they simply had to add a provision in their report for it. They simply could not have found against Oswald for practical and obviously, political reasons. You should read the full report, in no way does it support the Oswald lone gunman hypothesis like you claim.


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    I'll list the evidence against Oswald that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he was guilty of killing the President and JD Tippet
    1. He owned the Mannlicher Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and was ballistically matched to the CE399 bullet found on Connally's stretcer and the bullet fragments found in the limousine.
    The order form was filled out in his handwriting using his habitual pseudonym 'A. Hidell.' A forged ID found on Oswald had the same fictional name.
    The only problem I have with your above statement is CE399 was found on Connally's stretcher. Darrel Tomlinson could not positvely confirm
    which stretcher the bullet came from. Furthermore Tomlinson, OP Wright, and N Pool, all who saw this bullet at the hospital could not identify CE 399 as the one they originally saw.


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    I'll list the evidence against Oswald that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he was guilty of killing the President and JD Tippet


    3. Howard Brennan positively identified Oswald as the person he saw firing a rifle from the 6th floor window and the description circulated on the police radio net matches the description of the man numerous witnesses saw shooting Tippet to death. Tippet most likely stopped Oswald because he matched the description he must have heard on the radio net.
    Brennan's testimony kind of changes, he could not positively id Oswald in a police lineup, even after seeing pictures of Oswald on tv. In an FBI interview on Dec 17, he was sure it was Oswald. Jan 7 with the FBI again, he was not sure he could identify Oswald as being in the window. The WC does not rely on his evidence to place Oswald at the window.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 246 ✭✭Joshua Jones


    Completely irrelevant.

    The Warren Commission, The Rockerfeller Commission, The US House Select Committee on Assassinations and Ramsey Clarke Panel all examined the physical evidence thoroughly and came to same conclusions.

    Oswald acted alone, fired three shots killing JFK and wounding Governor Connally.

    The physical evidence that Oswald fired the shots is absolutely overwhelming.
    Shudder, The What commission. Less said the better.

    The reason the lone -gunman theory Had to be used was due to federal law, any assassination involving more than one gunman becomes a federal investigation. A lone gunman stays in the state where it occured i.e Texas.

    Who benefited most from the assassination (motive)?. Who had their power base in Texas?. There was a latent print found in the Depository which was identified many years later and promptly disregarded. The print belonged to Malcolm Wallace who previously was found guilty of 1st degree murder and recieved a 5yr SUSPENED sentence. Who was he the hatchet man for?.

    Winky winky.

    [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/SHARON%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.png[/IMG]


    lbj_wink.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    I'll list the evidence against Oswald that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he was guilty of killing the President and JD Tippet
    4. Marina Oswald testified that she took the backyard photos that show Oswald brandishing his rifle and handgun and she also testified that Oswald admitted to her that he attempted to kill General Walker. The bullet recovered after the Walker assassination attempt was the same type of bullet used in the JFK murder. The attempt to kill Walker was made only days after he recieved the rifle by mail order.
    Personally, I believe the photos are genuine, but many experts have differing opnions. Marina's credibility would certainly be an issue here and I believe, if it went to trial, a wife cannot be forced to testify against her husband. The WC experts both agreed it was a 6.5 mm round fired at Walker, one could not identify it as coming from Oswalds rifle, the other
    said it exhibited some of the common characteristics of Oswalds rifle.

    Rather damning evidence against Oswald, but hardly conclusive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭uncleoswald


    Who benefited most from the assassination (motive)?.
    Except you should never follow the motive only the evidence lest you start to warp the evidence to fit the motive.

    No fingerprint of Malcolm Wallace was actually found. Turns out there wasn't even a fingerprint to match to Wallace's as the only unidentified print left at the scene was a palmprint, which can't be matched to a fingerprint. Where the print that matched Wallace's came from is a mystery but it certainly didn't come from the book depository


    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/20b14f887320a4c0?tvc=2


  • Registered Users Posts: 767 ✭✭✭bog master


    I'll list the evidence against Oswald that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that he was guilty of killing the President and JD Tippet
    5. Buell Frazier who gave him a ride to work that morning testified that Oswald took a long brown paper package to work and last saw him taking it into the TSBD. The brown paper packaging was found in the 6th floor sniper nest. Oswald claimed the package contained curtain rods. No curtain rods were ever found and his room at the boarding house did not need curtains or curtain rods. Oswald kept his rifle in Ruth Paine's garage and made his unusual trip to the residence the day before the assassination. When the garage was searched by police the rifle was found to be missing from the blanket it was usually rolled in.
    Agreed Frazier did bring him to work with a long brown paper package and did testify he saw him enter the TSBD. However Frazier also testified that Oswald carried the package with his hand cupped around the bottom and the top of the package under his armpit. If the rifle was in that package, he could not have carried it in that manner, the rifle is to long.

    When shown the bag, both Frazier and Mrs Randle said the bag in evidence was to long and not similiar to the bag they saw Oswald with.

    Then, just to show you, I can try to to discredit even testimony that might back up my own views, Jack Dougherty testified he saw Oswald enter the building with NO package or parcel.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    JFK was ritually murdered by the illuminati. My god people argue and argue only over the trivial bull**** "evidence" they have read or were told.

    All you have to do is actually look at how many people were sacrificed before like this. You will learn that the same reasons apply to all of these murders.

    JFK went against his enemy. Why are people still waffling and arguing over the obvious:rolleyes:

    And please lay of the "one man theory who shot JFK" for fuuck sake.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    mysterious wrote: »
    JFK was ritually murdered by the illuminati.

    ritually murdered, didnt know being shot from a distance by a sniper(s) was considered a ritual murder...


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,133 ✭✭✭mysterious


    robtri wrote: »
    ritually murdered, didnt know being shot from a distance by a sniper(s) was considered a ritual murder...

    Ritual is more than what you know of it. I'm sure.:rolleyes:


Advertisement