With the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination fast approaching, I wanted to put out some facts regarding the case. In my younger days, I was fascinated by this case and, at the time, believed in a conspiracy. My fascination with the event caused me to seek out information on it. That information led me to change my mind. I now have no doubt Lee Harvey Oswald fired 3 shots from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) wounding Governor Connally and killing President Kennedy.
So for all the rational people out there, here are some facts to offer to your friends, family and co-workers when this case again begins to be discussed due to the coming anniversary.
Oswaldâs Skill
⢠Oswald was a Sharpshooter in the Marines.
⢠The Limousine was moving @ 9MPH and less than 100 yards away in an almost straight line with the 6th floor window. Translation: It was an easy shot.
⢠While in the Soviet Union, Oswald belonged to a rifle club where he used iron sights as opposed to the scope giving him a faster sight on target.
⢠When Oswald lived in New Orleans his neighbors reported that he was constantly practicing dry-firing and working the bolt of his rifle on his back porch.
The Rifle
⢠It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano.
⢠Two of Oswaldâs shots were 1.6 seconds apart.
⢠At a 1992 shooting event held by Richard Davis, the scene was set up to recreate the conditions in Dallas - same rifle, same distance, moving target, etc. Electronic timers timed each shooter. Several shooters not only broke the 1.6 second interval for two shots, but all 3 rounds hit their moving target. Every single shooter who did this was left-handed. Oswald shot left-handed.
The Bullet
⢠It is NOT âpristine." It is usually shown from the angle where it looks straight, such as viewing a banana from the angle where you cannot see its curve. Like a banana, the bullet is actually bent.
⢠The bullet had a heavy jacketed nose and could easily gone through flesh and bone and remain fairly intact.
⢠The lead fragments from the bullet were matched with neutron activation analysis by Dr. Vincent Gwen. The exact same lead from that bullet was found in both Connally and Kennedy.
The Angle of the Shots
⢠Entrance and exit wounds line up and clearly point to originating from above and behind.
⢠3D computer analysis based on entrance and exit wounds lead back directly to the 6th floor window of the TSBD.
Acoustic Evidence of 3 Shots
⢠A Dictabelt recording of the shots recorded from a police motorcycle microphone that was stuck-open shows only 3 shots.
⢠Modern acoustic analysis based on the location of the microphone triangulates all 3 sounds coming from the direction of the 6th floor window of the TSBD.
Misc.
⢠Oswald worked in that building and was stationed on the 6th floor.
⢠Oswaldâs palm print was on the rifle.
⢠Bullet fragments and the cartridge were ballistically traced to come from Oswaldâs gun.
⢠Autopsy results on Kennedyâs wound confirm they came from above and behind.
Case closed.
With the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination fast approaching, I wanted to put out some facts regarding the case. In my younger days, I was fascinated by this case and, at the time, believed in a conspiracy. My fascination with the event caused me to seek out information on it. That information led me to change my mind. I now have no doubt Lee Harvey Oswald fired 3 shots from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) wounding Governor Connally and killing President Kennedy. So for all the rational people out there, here are some facts to offer to your friends, family and co-workers when this case again begins to be discussed due to the coming anniversary. Oswaldâs Skill ⢠Oswald was a Sharpshooter in the Marines. ⢠The Limousine was moving @ 9MPH and less than 100 yards away in an almost straight line with the 6th floor window. Translation: It was an easy shot. ⢠While in the Soviet Union, Oswald belonged to a rifle club where he used iron sights as opposed to the scope giving him a faster sight on target. ⢠When Oswald lived in New Orleans his neighbors reported that he was constantly practicing dry-firing and working the bolt of his rifle on his back porch. The Rifle ⢠It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano. ⢠Two of Oswaldâs shots were 1.6 seconds apart. ⢠At a 1992 shooting event held by Richard Davis, the scene was set up to recreate the conditions in Dallas - same rifle, same distance, moving target, etc. Electronic timers timed each shooter. Several shooters not only broke the 1.6 second interval for two shots, but all 3 rounds hit their moving target. Every single shooter who did this was left-handed. Oswald shot left-handed. The Bullet ⢠It is NOT âpristine." It is usually shown from the angle where it looks straight, such as viewing a banana from the angle where you cannot see its curve. Like a banana, the bullet is actually bent. ⢠The bullet had a heavy jacketed nose and could easily gone through flesh and bone and remain fairly intact. ⢠The lead fragments from the bullet were matched with neutron activation analysis by Dr. Vincent Gwen. The exact same lead from that bullet was found in both Connally and Kennedy. The Angle of the Shots ⢠Entrance and exit wounds line up and clearly point to originating from above and behind. ⢠3D computer analysis based on entrance and exit wounds lead back directly to the 6th floor window of the TSBD. Acoustic Evidence of 3 Shots ⢠A Dictabelt recording of the shots recorded from a police motorcycle microphone that was stuck-open shows only 3 shots. ⢠Modern acoustic analysis based on the location of the microphone triangulates all 3 sounds coming from the direction of the 6th floor window of the TSBD. Misc. ⢠Oswald worked in that building and was stationed on the 6th floor. ⢠Oswaldâs palm print was on the rifle. ⢠Bullet fragments and the cartridge were ballistically traced to come from Oswaldâs gun. ⢠Autopsy results on Kennedyâs wound confirm they came from above and behind. Case closed.Unfortunately, it will never be closed to the conspiracy nuts. Lois
Yes, the longer the experts look at it, the more they dig up on Oswald, the more firm the conclusion.
Yea, you know Iâve kinda made âpeaceâ with all that too, that being, Oswald being the lone shooter and assassin of President Kennedy.
Then I listened to this interview with investigative reporter Philip Shenon whoâs written a retailed account of the Warren Commissionâs investigation.
While it hasnât changed my acceptance of Oswald being the only shooter - the information revealed is shocking and un-nerving.
So now in my mind the assassination of President goes down as another instance of a conspiracy of willful ignorance and looking the other way.
While not as malicious as the Bush/Cheney Administration playing dumb waiting for some catalyzing terrorist event for rallying the troops and proceeding with their New American Century strategy of attempting to own the world.
Every bit as destructive to healthy outcomes for our society⌠as the procession of events is demonstrating all too well.
A Cruel and Shocking Act Botched Investigation Fuels Kennedy Conspiracy Theories WHYY's Fresh Air - October 28, 2013 http://www.npr.org/2013/10/28/240822565/botched-investigation-fuels-kennedy-conspiracy-theories Veteran investigative reporter Philip Shenon looks for the root of five decades of speculation in A Cruel and Shocking Act. The new book recounts the work of the Warren Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the assassination. Shenon tells Fresh Air's Dave Davies that throughout the investigation, Chief Justice Warren â who was close to the Kennedy family â "makes decisions that seem to be designed to protect President Kennedy's legacy, to protect the privacy of the Kennedy family, even if that means that not all the facts are gathered about the assassination." Shenon pored over the files of the commission, spoke to many of its surviving staff attorneys, and did original research and interviews about some aspects of the case. While he's not convinced of a conspiracy to murder the president, he concludes that senior officials of the U.S. government, especially at the CIA, destroyed evidence and lied about the assassination and the events that led up to it. ...:down:
Alternate theories are useful when an event has not been well analyzed. When its been rehashed a thousand times with 99% of the evidence pointing to one explanation and all the alternates can come up with is a bunch of questions but no answers to explain the outstanding 1% then it sinks to the level of a conspiracy theory. Since we never have all the data surrounding any event there will always be some details we cant explain, but only if the event is important enough will conspiracy theories abound.
Two or three days a week a pair of my socks ends up in the middle of the living room. Iâm sure the dog is doing it but Iâve never so much as caught her near the socks and they are never chewed on and never even the slightest bit damp. Can I account for all the facts in this case? Nope, but I doubt many people are going to suggest that there is a conspiracy of government spooks or garden gnomes to move my socks. Where is a good conspiracy theorist when you need one. I want to know whats going on with my damn socks!!
P.S. - If you like thought experiments read Stephen Kings 11-22-63 sometime. Its an interesting book about what would have happened if someone had stopped Oswald.
Alternate theories are useful when an event has not been well analyzed. When its been rehashed a thousand times with 99% of the evidence pointing to one explanation and all the alternates can come up with is a bunch of questions but no answers to explain the outstanding 1% then it sinks to the level of a conspiracy theory. Since we never have all the data surrounding any event there will always be some details we cant explain, but only if the event is important enough will conspiracy theories abound. Two or three days a week a pair of my socks ends up in the middle of the living room. I'm sure the dog is doing it but I've never so much as caught her near the socks and they are never chewed on and never even the slightest bit damp. Can I account for all the facts in this case? Nope, but I doubt many people are going to suggest that there is a conspiracy of government spooks or garden gnomes to move my socks. Where is a good conspiracy theorist when you need one. I want to know whats going on with my damn socks!! P.S. - If you like thought experiments read Stephen Kings 11-22-63 sometime. Its an interesting book about what would have happened if someone had stopped Oswald.As for those socks, I set up a video camera and solve that mystery once and for all. But you'll have to do it secretly, keeping it from all family members including the dog. ;) Lois
Donât get me wrong, I was using âconspiracyâ in a cartoonish sense.
Havenât found the right word⌠something more subtle, âcascading consequencesâ doesnât do it justice, though the momentum of decisions sure plays a big roll. . . and so on . . .
In any event, Philip Shenonâs book isnât about any âconspiracyâ
so much as examining dynamics and power acting to protect itself.
Also itâs another fascinating behind-the-scenes look that reveals quite a bit.
I think the interview (and book) definitely add another unexpected dimension and shines a light on behavior and attitudes of the bureaucracy back then.
A Cruel and Shocking Act Botched Investigation Fuels Kennedy Conspiracy Theories WHYY's Fresh Air - October 28, 2013 http://www.npr.org/2013/10/28/240822565/botched-investigation-fuels-kennedy-conspiracy-theories
Kennedy was before my time, so I viewing the whole story with fresh eyes. Every time I hear the conspiracy theorists pushing their ideas on me, they say, âTheory X is certainly wrong becauseâŚâ. And Iâm left wondering, âWhat is theory X, anywayâ, as I walk away. I know how emotional everyone is about the topic, and no-one more-so than the conspiracy theorists, so theyâre the only ones talking about the assassination now-a-days. That makes it hard to get the real story, to say the least. It is terribly sad story and I hear it was a confusing trickle of information at that time.
So, I was so relieved to see CNNâs âThe Assassination of President Kennedyâ yesterday, because it just explained the strait facts, from beginning to end, and in an up-to-date version, they really dug-up some telling films about the prominent people involved that day, or involved with the later investigations. It began to turn me into a virgin conspiracy-nut by the middle of it (because they touched on some of the conspiracy theories), but settled me down by the end of it, with the facts that were brand new to me. 
I was shocked to see that Oswald was so calm while in hand-cuffs in the middle of the big frenzy, I would think heâd be frazzled whether innocent or guilty, due to the tremendous events around him. The investigations point the finger at Oswald, the Warren commission and all subsequent ones included. About prosecutor Garrison of New Orleans, his investigations were unfounded. I didnât see actor Kevin Costnerâs portrayal of Garrison, except for a clip or two. Theyâll probably show the CNN documentary on TV again, its a good one for those born after the 1960âs, because it takes the long comprehensive view, rather than seeing the piecemeal story as daily news updates.
Now Iâm happy that I finally understand why singers Mick Jagger, and Corey Glover sung about Kennedyâs death, and why the movie âFull Metal Jacketâ pseudo-bragged that Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine marksman. Thatâs a relief.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/us/jfk-assassination-anniversary
Yea, you know I've kinda made "peace" with all that too, that being, Oswald being the lone shooter and assassin of President Kennedy. Then I listened to this interview with investigative reporter Philip Shenon who's written a retailed account of the Warren Commission's investigation. While it hasn't changed my acceptance of Oswald being the only shooter - the information revealed is shocking and un-nerving. So now in my mind the assassination of President goes down as another instance of a conspiracy of willful ignorance and looking the other way. While not as malicious as the Bush/Cheney Administration playing dumb waiting for some catalyzing terrorist event for rallying the troops and proceeding with their New American Century strategy of attempting to own the world. Every bit as destructive to healthy outcomes for our society⌠as the procession of events is demonstrating all too well.I have no idea whether any government officials actually lied about the assassination or destroyed evidence after the fact. or, more important, why they would do so, it doesn't change the evidence we do have of who shot Kennedy. Whether there were shenanigans in the government about it is a completely different issue and has no bearing on who was directly responsible for the shooting. What makesyou think Philip Shenon is correct in his assessment? Have you or anyone else closely investigated his premise and where he got his evidence? LoisA Cruel and Shocking Act Botched Investigation Fuels Kennedy Conspiracy Theories WHYY's Fresh Air - October 28, 2013 http://www.npr.org/2013/10/28/240822565/botched-investigation-fuels-kennedy-conspiracy-theories Veteran investigative reporter Philip Shenon looks for the root of five decades of speculation in A Cruel and Shocking Act. The new book recounts the work of the Warren Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the assassination. Shenon tells Fresh Air's Dave Davies that throughout the investigation, Chief Justice Warren â who was close to the Kennedy family â "makes decisions that seem to be designed to protect President Kennedy's legacy, to protect the privacy of the Kennedy family, even if that means that not all the facts are gathered about the assassination." Shenon pored over the files of the commission, spoke to many of its surviving staff attorneys, and did original research and interviews about some aspects of the case. While he's not convinced of a conspiracy to murder the president, he concludes that senior officials of the U.S. government, especially at the CIA, destroyed evidence and lied about the assassination and the events that led up to it. ...:down:
In this mornings Buffalo News; they ran a story on Oswaldâs ex wife and how the British media are harassing her. IMO running the story only helps to harass her. Leave the lady alone she has suffered enough for marrying an vicious ideological idiot.
In this mornings Buffalo News; they ran a story on Oswald's ex wife and how the British media are harassing her. IMO running the story only helps to harass her. Leave the lady alone she has suffered enough for marrying an vicious ideological idiot.Add this to the long list of things I don't understand about human nature. IN a similar vein lots of people called and harassed the poor model who was the face of the ACA on the government website. Some people just need an outlet for their juvenile emotional outbursts and don't care how remote the connection between the subject of their anger and the focus of their attacks.
I have no idea whether any government officials actually lied about the assassination or destroyed evidence after the fact. or, more important, why they would do so, it doesn't change the evidence we do have of who shot Kennedy. Whether there were shenanigans in the government about it is a completely different issue and has no bearing on who was directly responsible for the shooting. What makes you think Philip Shenon is correct in his assessment? Have you or anyone else closely investigated his premise and where he got his evidence? LoisHave you listened to the interview?
Iâm just a working schmuck, so donât have a chance to âcheck it outâ beyond some objective surfing the web, and I havenât found anyone tearing apart Shenonâs claims and I do run into various independent reports along these lines,
and considering it does a nice job of echoing portions of my perspective⌠what can I say ;-
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/a-cruel-and-shocking-act-by-philip-shenon-8939682.html ⌠What Shenon reveals is not the vast conspiracy imagined by some, but just the sheer scale of confusion regarding the events in Dallas at the time and the many half-truths, back-covering and evasions which allowed the conspiracy to fester. He uncovers documents and stories which either made it nowhere near the Commission or â if they did â were blocked. The biggest of these pertains to the federal agencies' tracking of Oswald while he visited Mexico City in 1963. It is not the conspiracy imagined in Oliver Stone's execrable film JFK, but it is a hall or mirrors which will never be fully understood due to the inexplicable contemporary decisions of some key figures as well as the professional obfuscation of figures like the FBI's J Edgar Hoover and CIA "mole-hunter" James Angleton. âŚ:down: before you tag me, nooo, I haven't read the book, although with all this, guess I should make it a point. :-/
⢠A Dictabelt recording of the shots recorded from a police motorcycle microphone that was stuck-open shows only 3 shots. ⢠Modern acoustic analysis based on the location of the microphone triangulates all 3 sounds coming from the direction of the 6th floor window of the TSBD.And how can one triangulate based on one microphone? You need at least three. And even if it is sure that Oswald did it, in whose command was he? In the end, we know the tried assassination on Reagan was done by the KGB, and John Lennon was killed by the Knights Templar. No? %-P
Again, Iâm amazed at how such otherwise skeptical people such as yourselves can be utterly unskeptical and trusting of the official story. Itâs as if no amount of evidence will shake your belief and faith in organizations like the CIA, the Pentagon, and the US government. Amazing, and nutty.
And how can one triangulate based on one microphone? You need at least three.My mistake. I believe the method used was an audio technique known as Echo Location that determines the direction of sounds.
And even if it is sure that Oswald did it, in whose command was he?I only posted evidence as to who fired the shots and from where. Beyond that, I have no evidence. But then, again, neither do the conspiracy theorists. Their anomaly hunting is not evidence. So with that in mind, the null hypothesis that Oswald decided to do it himself due to his known violet extremism and impulsiveness is the one we should stay with until evidence otherwise surfaces.
Again, I'm amazed at how such otherwise skeptical people such as yourselves can be utterly unskeptical and trusting of the official story. It's as if no amount of evidence will shake your belief and faith in organizations like the CIA, the Pentagon, and the US government. Amazing, and nutty.Speaking for myself, I am skeptical of all conspiracy theories, especially those that would require the iintricate involvement and silence of many people. It goes against human nature to stay silent for very long. All of those people in the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon and other parts of the government, working in concert, and not one speaks up in 50 years? Many media sources would have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars or more for an interview with someone who was in on such a conspiracy and would spill the beans. All of the people who would have had to be involved are unlikely to turn away from large amounts of money and surely one of them would talk just out of guilt. Most of the supposed conspirators would now be dead and any one of them might have decided to record or write about his involvement to be revealed after his death, yet not one person had done so, not for money for his family, not for posthumous glory not to relieve himself of guilt. Those are the reasons I am skeptical about all conspiracy theories. They require too many people to act with faultless precision and nearly perfect timing and to keep complete silence for years. It goes against what we know about human nature and human abilities. To accept a conspiracy theory like that you would have to believe that not one credible person would break his silence for any reason. In addition, all of the investigators would also have to have been in on the conspiracy with not one person in a position to know what actually happened willing to tell what he or she knew. I put such a scenario in the category of fantasy. Lois
Again, I'm amazed at how such otherwise skeptical people such as yourselves can be utterly unskeptical and trusting of the official story. It's as if no amount of evidence will shake your belief and faith in organizations like the CIA, the Pentagon, and the US government. Amazing, and nutty.Cuthbert a good skeptic always employs Occams Razor. "among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected." That's why most of us usually look askance at conspiracy theories. They generally require a long list of suppositions in order to be true and there is often a much simpler explanation that is better supported by the facts we actually have. Conspiracies often depend largely on the facts we don't have in order to be believed.
Again, I'm amazed at how such otherwise skeptical people such as yourselves can be utterly unskeptical and trusting of the official story. It's as if no amount of evidence will shake your belief and faith in organizations like the CIA, the Pentagon, and the US government. Amazing, and nutty.Look at the facts I listed. None of them had anything to do with what any official government agency said. They included: Historical facts about Oswald Repeatable shots Finger/Palm Prints Neutron Activation Analysis Geometry Ballistics Forensics Acoustics Which ones do you disagree with? And why? Where is your evidence to the contrary?
Again, I'm amazed at how such otherwise skeptical people such as yourselves can be utterly unskeptical and trusting of the official story. It's as if no amount of evidence will shake your belief and faith in organizations like the CIA, the Pentagon, and the US government. Amazing, and nutty.Speaking for myself, I am skeptical of all conspiracy theories, especially those that would require the iintricate involvement and silence of many people. It goes against human nature to stay silent for very long. All of those people in the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon and other parts of the government, working in concert, and not one speaks up in 50 years? Many media sources would have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars or more for an interview with someone who was in on such a conspiracy and would spill the beans. All of the people who would have had to be involved are unlikely to turn away from large amounts of money and surely one of them would talk just out of guilt. Most of the supposed conspirators would now be dead and any one of them might have decided to record or write about his involvement to be revealed after his death, yet not one person had done so, not for money for his family, not for posthumous glory not to relieve himself of guilt. Those are the reasons I am skeptical about all conspiracy theories. They require too many people to act with faultless precision and nearly perfect timing and to keep complete silence for years. It goes against what we know about human nature and human abilities. To accept a conspiracy theory like that you would have to believe that not one credible person would break his silence for any reason. In addition, all of the investigators would also have to have been in on the conspiracy with not one person in a position to know what actually happened willing to tell what he or she knew. I put such a scenario in the category of fantasy. LoisAgain, you need to read Overthrow by Steve Kinzer, or The Shock Doctrine. The government IS very capable, especially the CIA, or carrying out highly coordinated plans without public knowledge. And witnesses and direct enablers do in fact speak out. But once the label of conspiracy is applied, they know they're in the clear. There are too many other sources of counter evidence. And of course, same goes for the unskeptics here who buy into the "government is innocent" theory. Any evidence presented now is prima faciea faulty, coerced, tainted, etc. Here's a start though for those who aren't so naive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamar_Waldron