RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Boardman writes: "For all the words that explain, mystify, speculate on, confuse, analyze, or obscure the reality of the Kennedy assassination, there are none that advance our understanding reliably past the threshold question of whether there was more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza that day in 1963."

President John F. Kennedy is seen riding in motorcade approximately one minute before he was shot in Dallas, Tx., on Nov. 22, 1963. In the car riding with Kennedy are Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy, right, Nellie Connally, left, and her husband, Gov. John Connally of Texas. (photo: AP)
President John F. Kennedy is seen riding in motorcade approximately one minute before he was shot in Dallas, Tx., on Nov. 22, 1963. In the car riding with Kennedy are Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy, right, Nellie Connally, left, and her husband, Gov. John Connally of Texas. (photo: AP)


Solving Kennedy's Murder: A Modest Proposal for Progress

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

26 November 13

 

There's no answer to the threshold question after fifty years

or all the words that explain, mystify, speculate on, confuse, analyze, or obscure the reality of the Kennedy assassination, there are none that advance our understanding reliably past the threshold question of whether there was more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza that day in 1963. As historian and private detective Josiah Thompson, author of the out-of-print "Six Seconds In Dallas," puts it:

"There is, and only ever has been - it seems to me - one threshold question. The only question in the case from the very beginning, was somebody shooting from up there, up front, up to the right front, up there in the knoll area? Was somebody shooting from up there? If shots came from more than one direction, then there is no doubt in my mind, there was a conspiracy. It's been that simple since back in the sixties, and it's still there. If that can't be known … then this case is going to go into history exactly the way it is now, which is a real mess!"

Thompson's comment is part of a recent 17-minute documentary by Erroll Morris, "November 22, 1963," on the New York Times Op-Docs webpage, but this is not an investigation that answers the threshold question any better than anyone else has, which is to say with any reasonable factual certainty. This short film leaves the viewer to wonder if the threshold question will ever be answered.

That's rather disingenuous on the part of the Times, Morris, and Thompson as it turns out, since Thompson's new book, "Last Second in Dallas," unambiguously concludes that there was a second shooter, who was on the grassy knoll. ["Last Second in Dallas" is not yet available, apparently, but "Six Seconds" is for sale on Amazon for $446 used or $529 new.]

Is there any hard evidence to confirm the circumstantial evidence?

Thompson's analysis is based on "self-validating" photographic evidence, including the Zapruder film as well as movies and stills taken by some two dozen people in Dealey Plaza at the time. But there is not, as yet, any known, definitive photographic record of any second shooter.

An argument might be made that there is a known, definitive record of the so-called Umbrella Man, which is true, but the record only demonstrates his existence, to the right front of the motorcade, not that he was (or was not) a shooter. The possibility that he was a shooter is tantalizing - he was standing next to the roadway only a few feet from the spot where Kennedy was shot. He was standing with an open umbrella on a sunny day, in a position behind a highway sign that screened him from view to the oncoming motorcade till it was almost beside him. He holds the umbrella in an ordinary way at first, then raises it high above his head as the President comes into range. For him to have been a shooter, the umbrella would likely have been his weapon, and there is apparently no evidence as to the actual nature of his umbrella. [Thompson has scoffed somewhat superciliously at Umbrella Man as a shooter; others have embraced the idea, without showing that a working umbrella weapon was available in 1963.]

The Umbrella Man is a diversion from the threshold question, being only a candidate for another shooter, not proof that there was one. There are not many likely places where one could find such conclusive evidence, but one of them is the second shooting victim of November 22, former Texas governor John B. Connally, who died on June 15, 1993, at the age of 76, with his body still carrying bullet fragments and scars on his back, chest, wrist and thigh from the Dallas shooting.

In a presidential assassination, is the nation not entitled to the best evidence?

There is no doubt that any bullet fragments remaining in Connally's body represent highly relevant forensic evidence that has been denied to all investigators for half a century. There is no way to know what that evidence would show, but it's possible it could provide ballistic proof of a second shooter. At a minimum there are numerous bullet fragments in Connally. One unconfirmed (and unlikely) report has it that Connally's body contains bullet fragments estimated to weigh more than the remains of the three bullets already in evidence. There has long been circumstantial evidence that Connally was hit by bullets shot from two different guns.

In Connally's obituary, the L.A. Times reported erroneously that "Connally always went along with the Warren Commission finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin, working alone." While that may be technically correct - that Connally "went along" with the official story - it evades the reality that Connally consistently said he heard the first shot and was hit by the second. If Connally's clear recollection is correct, then the so-called "Magic Bullet Theory" falls apart and the Warren Commission is left with no basis for concluding that Oswald was the only shooter.

While it is not clear why Connally withheld the evidence in his body while he was alive, the Connally family explicitly refused to let the FBI retrieve the evidence after Connally died. Arguably, this is an obstruction of justice, withholding evidence, that continues after more than fifty years. The Texas State Library and Archives Commission has now put Connally's bloodied and bullet-riddled clothes from November 22 on public display in Austin, for the first time ever in October 2013. Connally's widow, Nelly, who died in 2006, was in the car with her husband and the president and first lady. She had the clothes cleaned before donating them to the Commission.

Exhumation in criminal cases has ample precedent

At the time of Connally's death and burial in 1993, both independent researchers and the FBI sought access to Connally's body to retrieve whatever bullet fragments they could find. The request to the Connally family was handled with abysmal care, including an FBI Dallas office effort to reach the family while the funeral service was in progress. The suspicious observor might say that that's just how the government would behave if it wanted the request rejected. As the New York Times reported it at the time:

"Mr. Connally's family said through a spokesman today that most, and probably all, bullet fragments that had lodged in him were removed soon after he was shot and that they clearly showed then, as various official inquiries have concluded, that they were from one of the two bullets that hit the President.

"'Beyond that,' said a statement issued by Julian O. Read, a friend of the family, Mr. Connally had been available for 30 years, before dying Tuesday here in Houston, 'for any legitimate research request,' and 'in all that time no such request has been made by any responsible authority.' The statement said the family would 'resist vigorously any efforts to disturb the body of John Connally.' "

By implication, then, requests were made and denied, because they didn't come from what Connally deemed "responsible authority." Both Texas and Federal law require that either the family must agree or a court must issue an order before an exhumation may legally proceed. In 1993, a Justice Department spokeswoman asserted, falsely, that it had no authority to exhume Connally's body without the family's permission. The alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was exhumed in 1981 after a three-year legal fight, in an unsuccessful effort to prove an author's contention that the man buried as Oswald was in fact a Russian agent.

As the old saying has it, "you can't take it with you." But in this case, Connally has taken it with him, and what it is, perhaps, is evidence that might resolve one of the more vexing mysteries in American history. The Connally family's response in 1993, while understandable in human terms, also raises ambiguities about the evidence. The family's statement asserts that the fragments in Connally "were from one of the two bullets that hit the President." But that's not good for the official story, which holds together only if the first shot hitting Kennedy also hit Connally. The family offered no evidence in support of its statement.

The questions about the bullet fragments in Connally's body are a mystery for only one reason: investigators have had no access to them. We know where the evidence is, we know how to secure it, we know its potential to solve a mystery that the nation needs solved. It's long past time for some responsible authority to act in the public interest.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+71 # MsAnnaNOLA 2013-11-26 15:41
There are many more questions than if there was a second shooter. First, there is little evidence to show that Lee Harvey Oswald was the first shooter. There is ample evidence that Oswald was framed. There is ample evidence the government was responsible for the cover up. Google the history channel documentary series called "The men who killed Kennedy" watch the unredacted 9 episodes. There are interview after interview of eyewitnesses who were in Dealy plaza. They describe shots from the grassy knoll, not from the depository where Oswald worked. The government story is preposterous. That is why we are still talking about this fifty years later.
 
 
+19 # WBoardman 2013-11-26 19:44
While it's easy to agree that
"the government story is preposterous,"
there's NO agreement,
NO compelling evidence
on any, single alternative story.

Hard evidence of a second shooter,
as opposed to the logical inference,
would perhaps force an actual criminal investigation,
which has not been allowed by "responsible authority."

The argument for exhuming Connally is clear, direct,
comprehensible, and a serious challenge to the
official story -- as in: well, if the official story is true,
Connally's bullet fragments will confirm it....
 
 
+36 # AshamedAmerican 2013-11-26 23:32
It is available for anyone to see that he was shot from the front right. This is a very compelling answer to the threshold question.
 
 
-9 # robcarter.vn 2013-11-27 00:22
William probably all three as you ask "was somebody shooting from up there, up front, up to the right front, up there in the knoll area?" It's like GWB/Blair WMD's and Bengazi ~ renditions happen. Planned and unlikely to leave evidence.
 
 
+31 # WestWinds 2013-11-27 00:25
[quote name="WBoardman"]

"While it's easy to agree that
"the government story is preposterous,"
there's NO agreement,
NO compelling evidence
on any, single alternative story. "

--- Yes there is, I've seen it. I saw a complete evaluation of the shots. One came from behind, went through JFK, through the passenger seat Connolly was sitting in and traveled Connolly's right arm that he had propped up on the arm rest.

Also, the Zapruder tape shows a puff of smoke coming from a guy standing on the knoll.

AND, the bullet that blew out the back of JFK's head came from the front.

Oswald could not have possibly done all of this with a bolt action rifle in the time frame (seconds) that it happened.

Besides, Oswald was seen a couple of floors below the 6th floor of the depository he was supposed to have shot from, getting a cold drink at a vending machine at the time of the actual assassination.
 
 
+7 # PaineRad 2013-11-27 04:20
Your comment about the bullet that went thru JFK's neck also went through Connally's right wrist. But that is improbable for several reasons: the angles are all wrong and the timing is probably wrong because Connally was still holding his hat after that first shot should have passed thru his wrist.
 
 
-8 # arquebus 2013-11-27 09:32
The time frame as I recall was four seconds. Plenty of time to get off 3 shots. When the Marine Sniper school test fired the rifle for speed, they got off 3 aimed shots in even less time.
 
 
+4 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:21
Quoting arquebus:
The time frame as I recall was four seconds. Plenty of time to get off 3 shots. When the Marine Sniper school test fired the rifle for speed, they got off 3 aimed shots in even less time.

..Like all Marines, Oswald was trained and tested in shooting and he scored 212 in December 1956, slightly above the requirements for the designation of sharpshooter...
en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Lee_Harv ey_Oswald
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 21:20
"Sharpshooter" sounds impressive until you realize that this was the lowest score that could still qualify in the Marines. "Slightly above the requirements for sharpshooter" means mediocre and barely proficient. And that was with a good gun, not a Mannlicher-Carc ano, notorious in WWII as a "humane" gun because it was so poor as a weapon. And Oswald's Mannlicher-Carc ano had a defective sight that was not properly aimed. And his Marine shooting was not at a moving target, seen through the branches of a tree. And if he wanted to hit the president, he had a much better shot before the car turned, when it first entered Dealey Plaza and was driving straight toward the TSBD with no obstructions between it and the purported shooter. Nor was anyone able to duplicate Oswald's alleged feat of running down four flights of stairs within a half minute of the assassination, and be seen in the lunchroom on the second floor, not even breathing hard, let alone out of breath.
 
 
-5 # BobC 2013-11-27 10:35
The Zapruder film doesn't even show the grassy knoll. Zapruder was standing on the pedestal next to the knoll, pointing his camera at the street. The back of JFK's head was not blown out; the Zapruder film DOES show that. And Oswald was seen at the 2nd-floor vending machine by a cop a couple minutes AFTER the assassination; that's why the cop was there, searching the place.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-27 10:38
Also, the bullet that went through JFK's neck did not go through the seat. It went through air before striking Connolly. The trajectory is correct because JFK was to the back right and above Connolly's level.
 
 
+3 # Michael Lee Bugg 2013-11-28 09:24
Bobc, Thanks for the logic and facts, instead of fantasy, that you bring to this discussion! I have no doubt that lots of right wing fanatics wanted JFK dead because he would not invade Cuba or start a war with Russia, and because he intended to extract us from Vietnam, thus ending the tax dollar gravy train for our insatiable
defense contractors. I also believe that Oswald was used by some of these right-wingers to do the dirty work and then get nailed as the lone gunman. He was probably a good enough shot to make the shots from that distance and at the slow speed the cars were moving, but I do not think he was the lone shooter. Based on the book, "Mortal Error" and a recent viewing of the enhanced Zapruder film in slow motion, I believe the shot that entered the back of Kennedy's head and exited between his right eye and right ear could have been accidentally fired from the AR-15 held by the Secret Service agent sitting on the left side of the back seat of the car behind JFK. The government cover up was to hide the embarrassing fact that the fatal shot was accidentally fired by one of the men charged to protect JFK. The shots from the front of JFK's car were only the echoes from Oswald's two shots and the one from the AR-15. No picture that I have seen of JFK shows the back of his head blown off. Only the bloody, matted hair from a single entrance wound! Connally had turned to his left after Oswald's first shot thus making him lined up right for Oswald's second.
 
 
-3 # BobC 2013-11-28 20:50
Thanks Michael. I don't think Oswald would have allowed himself to be influenced by right-wingers or especially to be enlisted to do their dirty work. He had become disillusioned with JFK, but for his own reasons; i.e., he thought JFK was too antagonistic toward Castro (i.e., the opposite of what the right-wingers thought). He might even have been trying to impress Castro after being turned away at the Cuban embassy in Mexico City just a few weeks earlier. He was a very frustrated individual on multiple fronts. As for the theory posited in "Mortal Error", as I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I have found it to be intriguing but ultimately flawed. You are right about the massive exit wound being on the top/right/mid-t o-front area of his skull, not the back of it.
 
 
+4 # RMDC 2013-11-28 08:06
Could you explain. i've seen the restored version of the Zapruder film it is seems pretty clear to me that the back of JFK's head was blown back onto the trunk. Jackie K crawled back on to the trunk to pick it up. Do you see something different?
 
 
-4 # BobC 2013-11-28 20:52
Yes. It was not the back. The spray of blood, brain, bone, and hair went both straight up and forward; this is what I see on the Zapruder film. With the car moving forward, some of what went straight up ended up on the trunk, which is what Jackie was reaching for.
 
 
+3 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:17
Also, the Zapruder tape shows a puff of smoke coming from a guy standing on the knoll?
He was sot with muzzleloader!
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-28 20:56
No, it does not show that.
 
 
-56 # Pancho 2013-11-27 04:20
It's not at all clear.

The conspiracy theorists (hallucinators would be a better word) always have some back up delusion.

If the family wants the body to remain as interred, why cater to the whims of some whackjob who is most unlikely to find anything interesting?

Let's move on, to all the nonsense about the Twin Towers, shall we?
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2013-11-30 14:09
'Let's move on' is always the response of those who do NOT want things to be known or accounted for ...
and that goes for the arrogant response of "so?" when serious questions were asked about WMDs of Darth Cheney, and also the response by Opus Dei's Scalia about the SELECTION by the court of GW Bush. There is a PATTERN here reminiscent of the Star Wars quip "nothing to see here, move on, nothing to see here" ... .
 
 
+1 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-11-26 23:00
Ten people "know." But, which of them is (are) "right?"
 
 
-41 # Pancho 2013-11-27 04:17
Almost everything on the "History" channel is complete bullshit.

Why should this be any different?

Watch out for those space aliens, the ones who regularly get coverage there.
 
 
+6 # dickbd 2013-11-27 15:49
I have to agree that a lot of stuff on the history channel is questionable. However, sometimes good stuff comes out of there--like a report about the seldom-mentione d expeditionary force that was sent into Russia to reinstall the Czar after the revolution.

Kennedy was my favorite president, and a lot of people wanted him dead. He was disgusted with intelligence agencies--espec ially the CIA--and he wanted to put an end to the cold war.

Still, there is not any good evidence of a conspiracy or of multiple shooters. Eye witness testimony is extremely unreliable. PBS had a good "Cold Case" documentary in which a lot of the problems were explained. I recommend that.
 
 
+31 # tigerlille 2013-11-26 17:54
Common sense suggests that Connolly with held the evidence in his body for 30 years, and his family since his death 20 years ago, because they are participating in the cover up. This may or may not be voluntary, if it is the case. I am not convinced that the evidence to be derived from the bullet fragments lodged in his body are so crucial when there is substantial evidence of a second shooter, and overwhelming evidence of a cover up.
 
 
-37 # BKnowswhitt 2013-11-26 22:43
Total bull. The question should be in my view. Why did this low level op Oswald do it? The gov killed K conspiracists theorists would be correct only if they knew about him and made sure the canopies were off the cars so he could get a clean shot. That would be an 'inside job' .. And there was much evidence that Oswald and Ruby had underworld connections in us and russia but also cuban connections. If you hear k's speeches last two weeks before he died .. he was getting ready to invade cuba and depose castro .. word was out and the dumbasses in the Secret Service in that day failed to protect the Commander in Cheif .. no way should he have been in an open car .. completely naive misread of safety ... unless of course they were non participating players in the end result ..
 
 
+2 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:26
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
Why did this low level op Oswald do it?
- he was psycho ...
"Oswald attended the 7th grade in the Bronx, New York but was often truant, which led to a psychiatric assessment at a juvenile reformatory.[14 ] The reformatory psychiatrist, Dr. Renatus Hartogs, described Oswald as immersed in a "vivid fantasy life, turning around the topics of omnipotence and power, through which [Oswald] tries to compensate for his present shortcomings and frustrations." Dr. Hartogs detected a "personality pattern disturbance with schizoid features and passive-aggress ive tendencies" and recommended continued treatment"
 
 
+4 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 07:49
You are way off. First, Oswald's Russian/communi st connections were all made at the behest of U.S. intelligence in order to set up his backstory to be the fall guy. That is the only reason they would have allowed him to re-enter the country after defecting to Russia and giving away military secrets to the KGB. Second Kennedy's speeches in the days leading up to the assassination were the most sympathetic to Cuba and Castro that he ever made - particularly the American University commencement address. For many Americans, it was the first time they saw the Cuban people as human beings rather than just "commies."
 
 
+53 # PaulV 2013-11-26 23:04
I do research in Acoustics and Signal Processing. I visited BBN in the early 70's and was impressed with their deconvolution work. In 1975, working for the Church commission they presented a deconvolution analysis of a recording and concluded that there were two locations for gun shots. Somehow, as time has passed not much has been talked about this evidence. Signal processing is even better today and the analysis should be duplicated. Although the head of BBN tried to soften the solidity of the research, I have talked with those who were involved in the convolution work and they were quite confident of the results.
 
 
+31 # brux 2013-11-26 23:35
The tried to poo-poo the evidence and call it gun shots, but the premise was that if shots were fired from the same location, they would have the same echo profile as the shock wave hit and bounced off the buildings and made it's way to the microphone. One shot did not fit the profile of the others, meaning it had to have been fired from another location.
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 21:29
One correction. It was the House Special Committee on assassinations [HSCA] that "investigated" the Kennedy assassination, and found out about the audio evidence. The Church Committee, along with its much more aggressive counterpart the Pike Committee in the House, investigated assassinations by the CIA of foreigners, not domestic U.S.ans.
 
 
+21 # spercepolnes 2013-11-26 23:20
Oswald was meant to be (officially) firing full steel jacketed rounds from his rifle - they don't fragment. So - why did the bullets fragment the way they did - from a second or third rifle - probably a .223!
 
 
+4 # Centrider 2013-11-27 00:51
"So - why did the bullets fragment the way they did - from a second or third rifle - probably a .223"

The caliber round used was 6.5X52 =.268 in. not .223. So why do you assume the .223?
 
 
-28 # Pancho 2013-11-27 04:24
Why?

Why it's part of the conspiracy hysteria.
 
 
+5 # JSRaleigh 2013-11-27 09:18
Quoting Centrider:
"So - why did the bullets fragment the way they did - from a second or third rifle - probably a .223"

The caliber round used was 6.5X52 =.268 in. not .223. So why do you assume the .223?


There's one "theory" that the killing shot was a negligent discharge from a Secret Service officer's weapon. That weapon was an AR-15 that would take a .223 round.

Does NOT compute though, because the Secret Service officer in question was in or on the vehicle immediately behind the President's limousine and the main evidence pointing to a second assassin is the shot seen in the Zapruder film that appears to come from the front.
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 21:32
Also, the claim by the SS agent of accidentally firing the fatal shot does not comport with standard procedure for the SS, which is not to have unloaded guns as the agent claimed. Standard SS procedure is to have guns which are loaded and ready to fire, not useless guns that one has to stop to load in the event of an emergency.
 
 
+2 # PaineRad 2013-11-27 03:49
The .223 could not have been the magic bullet found on the stretcher/gurne y at Parkland. But it also was not a Carcano round as it was, according to the two people who handled it that day, pointed at the end like a spitzer.

Also, .223 caliber rifles were few and far between in 1963. And that round fragments and tumbles when it hits something more resistant than flesh and jello. I doubt it would have had the energy to blast his skull off.

You are right that metal jacketed rounds do not easily fragment, but the Carcano round did tumble easily. I do not know what the jacket is made of; generally jackets are not steel. Jacketed rounds generally deform into a mushroom shape. And the bullet claimed to have been found at Parkland was not mushroomed.

The simple fact is that we do not know what caliber bullet(s) was/were fired that day. Most people just assume it was the Carcano bullet that was fired.
 
 
-1 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 20:40
Unless a chisel, or a knife, was taken to the tip of the round before it was fired, forming an "X" in the tip, essentially turning it into a sort of "hollow-point" round. Then it would probably fragment considerably.
 
 
-6 # Pancho 2013-11-27 04:25
PBS had a terrific special on the assassination. In it, they showed the deformed bullet.

Sure looked like brass to me.

It had wonderful modern forensics too.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:11
The bullet (CE 399) shows all signs of having been fired from the Oswald rifle. However, any deformation it has is consistent with having been fired into soft batting, which is how ballistics tests are done so as to not harm the bullet, leaving the striations clear.

Further, the only lead missing from CE 399 is from the heel, which happens when the round is fired and the hot, expanding gas of gun powder ignitions melts and vaporizes the bare lead on the heel.

The jacket is intact and no lead is missing from the nose, which is the first part of a bullet to splinter off on hard impact.

Three fragments of lead were removed from Connally, and others were buried with him. That lead did not come from CE 399.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 20:41
But they intentionally whitewashed that there was more than one shooter, or left the whole thing muddied and full of doubts, didn't they?
 
 
0 # JJS 2013-11-30 07:30
It was a Frontline production on PBS.
I found it very interesting and feel it gave reasonable argument and credibility for the "single bullet" theory.

Still, there are so many questions... Anyone here have a chance to read Rolling Stone article by RFK, Jr ?
 
 
+44 # brux 2013-11-26 23:33
I was alive and in the 1st grade when President Kennedy was murdered, and I remember it, and it stuck with me. I have never in my life seen the film of the other woman taking a movie on the other side of the street from Zapruder. To me the film shows a shot from the front. I've shot guns at fruit, apples, melons, cans, etc and the spray pattern to me seems to show a shot from the front. I'm not an expert, but that is what it looks like to me. And then ... how could Jack Ruby be crazy and twisted enough to murder Oswald before he could be interrogated, unless he was shutting up a patsy? I still think after all this time there was a conspiracy. I think it was people in the US that did not like Kennedy's populism, but I have no idea who, or if it was any particular one group ... I'd have to say it was a class of SOB business people, coincidentally, like the people who run and want even more power to run the country today.
 
 
+32 # WestWinds 2013-11-27 00:33
Quoting brux:
" ... I still think after all this time there was a conspiracy. I think it was people in the US that did not like Kennedy's populism, but I have no idea who, or if it was any particular one group ... I'd have to say it was a class of SOB business people, coincidentally, like the people who run and want even more power to run the country today.
"

--- George Herbert Walker Bush was in the CIA at the time. This is George W. Bush's father. The Bush family are all international oil people.
 
 
+13 # Radscal 2013-11-27 11:24
It's said that everyone remembers where they were when JFK was gunned down.

George HW stated he couldn't remember where he was on 11/22/63.

When evidence was found proving he was in Dallas that morning, he suddenly remembered, and also remembered leaving Dallas before the murder.

Another person who "forgot" was Richard Nixon, who was also in Dallas, the day before, and flew to NYC the day of the murder.
 
 
-39 # albertchampion 2013-11-26 23:34
who was really murdered that day?

could it have been a double?

after all, in violation of all normal autopsy regimens, the decedent did not have his fingerprints taken.

many think that because the "autopsists" failed to dissect the kidneys, the adrenals, that they were hiding jfk's addisonism.

but, i offer you a different perspective, what if the investigation of those organs, glands that would have occurred in any normal autopsy, were avoided because healthy adrenal glands would have been discovered. what would that have meant?

that the decedent wasn't jfk?

if one were to study jfk's health, any pix of his life after entering the congress, one might conclude that the individual occupying the white house was not jfk.

so, there is an interesting question...when did the real jfk die? and was it a double murdered in dallas?
 
 
+2 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 07:51
Huh?
 
 
-59 # BobC 2013-11-26 23:46
Wow; does William Boardman call himself a journalist? There have been dozens of forensic analyses and reenactments using the same trajectory, gun, and bullets used by Oswald from the 6th-floor window; they've been shown in documentaries, and they've all been conclusive: Oswald acted alone. The conspiracy theorists continue to rely on debunked assumptions and nonsense while ignoring the actual evidence.
 
 
+13 # Henry 2013-11-27 08:52
Wow: does BobC call himself someone who reads anything beyond the Party Line?
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-27 10:00
There is no "Party Line" 50 years later. There is just 50 years' worth of examination of the evidence. To name just one example, Boardman devotes two full paragraphs to the "Umbrella Man". The umbrella man and the umbrella itself appeared before the House Select Committee in the 1970s; the raised umbrella was a protest against JFK's father, who had supported Neville Chamberlain. Asked and answered.
 
 
-6 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:36
"Oswald acted alone. The conspiracy theorists continue to rely on debunked assumptions and nonsense while ignoring the actual evidence"
agree - and it is sad how Americans are brainwashed by Hollywood/TV fiction ... nd paranoia. Look at other assassinations .. mostly single psychos .. Oswald types
en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Lee_Harv ey_Oswald
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2013-11-28 03:33
Where's the real Activista? What have you done with her?!
 
 
+33 # ladypyrates 2013-11-27 00:00
Boardman's lamenting that there is no hard evidence is just more of the cover-up. Attorney Doug Weldon interviewed George Whitaker (the Ford glass plant supervisor at Rouge River) who was present when the windshield from President Kennedy's limo was destroyed. Before it was destroyed, Whitaker put his finger through a bullet hole in the windshield which he stated was clearly a result of a shot coming from the FRONT of the car. The hole was about 4-6 inches to the right of the rear view mirror as viewed from the front. It was impossible for Oswald to have made a frontal shot.
 
 
+1 # brux 2013-11-27 01:08
I think the world would have heard an seen it if there was a hole in the windshield ... like everyone in the car would have said something.
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:58
You mean this hole?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/infrogmation/4093189658/

You may also see it here:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/04/14/the-jfk-war-the-challenging-case-of-robert-groden/

And here:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13247

And here:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread847776/pg1
 
 
-2 # brux 2013-11-28 00:29
To me that did not look like a hole. If a bullet that did what it did to Kennedy's head went through that windshield, it would look like more than a crack, it would have broken the whole windshield.

It's clear to me that a shot came from the front thought, but I don't think it went through the windshield.
 
 
+39 # jbell94521 2013-11-27 00:21
I'm pretty sure that I am wasting my time even typing this. There is positive proof that even if Oswald had anything to do with the assassination, (which I doubt), that he could not have acted alone. The rifle that was supposedly found in the book depository and that he allegedly used was not capable of firing the number of bullets in the short time-frame in which they were fired. Numerous world-class marksmen have attempted to replicate the feat with a similar rifle. None have come close to succeeding. So that proves that at the very least, either that was not the rifle used, which means that Oswald likely was not involved, and that other shooter(s0 were involved. This also proves that there was a cover-up and still is one. None of the so-called conspiracy debunkers has ever been able to counter this argument in favor of the basic premise that there was a conspiracy. Period!

I say this is a waste of my time because this line of thinking has been around since shortly after the assassination and most likely all I will get for my trouble is some trolls making stupid statements to try and counter the facts I have laid out here and attacking my character while they are at it. I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football that Lucy holds and then jerks away. Oh well....
 
 
+4 # brux 2013-11-27 01:05
Check out the NOVA Program Cold Case JFK at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/cold-case-jfk.html

This is an interesting forensic investigation. It's interesting, but I don't buy it.
 
 
+8 # ericlipps 2013-11-27 05:45
Quoting jbell94521:
I'm pretty sure that I am wasting my time even typing this. There is positive proof that even if Oswald had anything to do with the assassination, (which I doubt), that he could not have acted alone. The rifle that was supposedly found in the book depository and that he allegedly used was not capable of firing the number of bullets in the short time-frame in which they were fired. Numerous world-class marksmen have attempted to replicate the feat with a similar rifle. None have come close to succeeding. So that proves that at the very least, either that was not the rifle used, which means that Oswald likely was not involved, and that other shooter(s0 were involved. This also proves that there was a cover-up and still is one. None of the so-called conspiracy debunkers has ever been able to counter this argument in favor of the basic premise that there was a conspiracy. Period!

Some years ago the time-frame issue was addressed in a manner unfortunately all too typical of investigations into JFK's murder: decades after the event, researchers went over the Zapruder film and "discovered" three whole extra seconds between the first and third shots.

When people are that desperate to make the evidence fit a particular theory, we'll probably never get a straight answer.
 
 
+13 # AMLLLLL 2013-11-27 09:14
jbell the dead witness list alone should be cause for suspicion. The chances of having 49 deaths in the 3 years (and mostly in clusters after the revelation of new evidence)follow ing the assassination are something like 3 trillion to one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB5JGfxIxFk …

While this is kind of hokey, I've seen a photo of the actual list. All manners of death, two totally unexplained, are one of about six; heart attack ( remember the CIA can manufacture those to look authentic),car crash,cancer,st abbing, suicide (one of the policemen witnesses who talked too much 'committed suicide' with a shotgun to the chest, even though he owned two handguns), one private plane crash, one karate chop to the neck. One woman 'hanged herself' while in custody.

Here's another tidbit:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/assassination-studies-1/the-party-before-the-assassination.html

It's unbelievable that this is unquestioned, but fish stinks from the head.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2013-11-27 12:25
The Oswald feat has been duplicated in a demonstration that showed it was possible, but HIGHLY unlikely.

In 1967, CBS set up the most realistic recreation I've seen. They had 11 marksmen make a total of 37 attempts (after practicing).

17 times, the Mannlicher-Carc ano failed (45%).
Of the 20 times then successfully got off 3 shots, only once was one marksman able to hit the moving target with the 2nd and 3rd shots as the Warren Commission claimed Oswald had done.

That's less than a 3% success rate, AFTER practice. I can no longer find the video of the full test, just the one successful attempt.

So, Oswald would have to have been a VERY lucky assassin to do it on his first attempt, especially when one considers that he allegedly missed a shot at a seated General Walker from less than 20 yards away a few months earlier..

Interestingly, the one marksman who succeeded in this recreation, Donahue, is the one who came up with the theory that Agent Hickey had accidentally made the fatal headshot from the SS care behind the limo.
 
 
+1 # BobC 2013-11-27 18:46
Donahue's theory was my favorite at one time, but then I learned that the MC bullet will in fact shatter when slamming into a skull; it was tested on goats and human cadavers. Not sure why Donahue didn't know this, being a ballistics expert, but he kept insisting that the MC bullet will never ever break up.
 
 
-22 # Centrider 2013-11-27 00:33
I was a returned AF vet attending Chicago Teacher's College-North on the day and date President Kennedy was killed. I well remember that day.

I have nothing to offer as evidence except that in general I don't believe in conspiracies. In other words, my first thought is NOT that the Kennedy assassination was set up by all the agencies/indivi duals listed, just because so many are offered up that in my mind, they cancel each other, much as sound waves can cancel each other giving, in effect, silence.

So, with an apology to Occam, he of the Razor fame (Occam's Razor). Simply stated, and probably overly simplified: The simplest explanation might just be the best.
 
 
+28 # brux 2013-11-27 01:07
That is really unsound reasoning. Conspiracies exist, you can read about one of them in Julius Caesar ... what do you mean you do not believe in conspiracies? That's just silly.
 
 
-19 # Centrider 2013-11-27 01:46
"This is an interesting forensic investigation. It's interesting, but I don't buy it."

So, tell me than, what evidence will you accept?

And also, tell me if you believe (and that's what it is, a belief) that it was a conspiracy, name the conspirators?
 
 
+22 # PaineRad 2013-11-27 03:36
Really? You are going with 'name the conspirators'? Hell, we can't name thousands of conspirators daily running around on Wall Street. Until he was arrested, you couldn't name Bernie Madoff or several others arrested for insider trading as conspirators.

While I can't name them, I can suggest that others saw them and described 'Suit Man' and 'Working Man' behind the fence on the grassy knoll. Most folks near the knoll pointed to the fence when the cops showed up. At least one saw smoke coming from a spot at the fence.
 
 
-2 # arquebus 2013-11-28 15:00
Recall that all of Caesar's "conspirators" were revealed Human beings are a garrulous lot...if there was some sort of conspiracy, by this time participants would have blabbed....espe cially since it would mean instant wealth and safety.
 
 
0 # brux 2013-11-29 23:13
Look at the media space around this ... many of those who have come forward are crazies and they have tainted the whole subject. Anyone who comes forward now is just overshadowed by the nuts. Then there was E. Howard Hunt's deathbed confession trying to blame Lyndon Johnson ... which was probably a cold and calculated attempt to take the focus off George H. W. Bush who was head of the CIA anti-Castro tricks organization. It would hardly be wealth and safety.
 
 
+21 # samiam 2013-11-27 01:39
Occam probably concluded that the Earth is flat because it is the simplest explanation.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2013-11-27 12:29
"... just because so many are offered up that in my mind, they cancel each other..."

Which, of course is precisely the purpose of disinformation campaigns. Present so many theories, including many patently absurd ones, that the mind simply rejects them all.
 
 
-5 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:43
Agree - Warren - if not perfect - is MOST plausible scenario - there was ONE shooter en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Lee_Harv ey_Oswald
 
 
+4 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 07:57
How is the most plausible scenario one that defies all of the physical forensic evidence?
 
 
-12 # BobC 2013-11-27 00:35
jbell, the people who say this are assuming, incorrectly, that the 3 shots were fired in less than 6 seconds. It was actually a slightly longer duration. I have seen numerous documentaries showing marksmen firing 3 shots from the Mannlicher-Carc ano in the same amount of time.
 
 
+19 # samiam 2013-11-27 01:37
Firing the gun is one thing, hitting the target was another matter. Of the test firings done later by the FBI most of them could not match the results attributed to Oswald.
 
 
-5 # BobC 2013-11-27 10:02
Most could not, but some could.
 
 
-1 # Activista 2013-11-28 02:46
Like all Marines, Oswald was trained and tested in shooting and he scored 212 in December 1956, slightly above the requirements for the designation of sharpshooter ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 21:56
I already replied to this when you previously suggested it early in the discussion. "Sharpshooter" required a score above 210 -- Oswald's 1956 test barely qualified; "Marksman" required a score between 190 and 209. Oswald's most recent test prior to the assassination -- and there is no evidence that he practiced after that -- was in May 1959, when he scored 191, barely enough to qualify as a "Marksman." (I was going by memory when I previously posted; Sharpshooter was the middle range, not the lowest, but the fact remains that Oswald was, by Marine standards, a very poor shot, even when given three weeks of intensive training, firing at a stationary target with no obstructions, and using a decent weapon.)
 
 
+3 # PaineRad 2013-11-27 03:28
You are assuming the single bullet theory is correct. No one has ever managed four shots in that time.

As for the single bullet theory, the claims that Connelly sat inboard of JFK are laughable. At least one effort to support it shows a picture taken from behind with a wide angle lens which does seem to show that. But it also shows the base of the windshield to JFK's left. To conclude that Connelly sat to JFK's left would mean that the Lincoln was shaped like a triangle. That is because a lot of folks appear not to understand "perspective" and the notion of a "vanishing point".

The two people at the hospital who handled the magic bullet found on a gurney said it was pointed at the front end, not rounded like a Carcano bullet.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2013-11-27 12:31
I have found precisely ONE successful attempt to reproduce the Oswald feat. Even in that recreation, the success rate was less than 3% of all the attempts.

So, it's possible, but HIGHLY unlikely.
 
 
+1 # BobC 2013-11-27 18:48
I saw a former Navy Seal do it in a new documentary that aired in just the past couple weeks.
 
 
+11 # soularddave 2013-11-27 00:47
This is why I continue to pay attention to stories about the assassination. From these comments, I get two entirely new, to me, elements to consider. I accept one and dismiss the other - but I won't forget either.
 
 
+5 # samiam 2013-11-27 01:31
To make matters more complex,on the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination there were interviews shown of a reporter named Pierce Allman who claimed that he was in Dealy Plaza when the shooting occurred. Just seconds after the third shot he ran up the steps and into the first floor of the TSBD building and asked a man where the nearest telephone was located. The man, Lee Harvey Oswald, showed him where it was located.
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 21:01
How very "convenient", eh? He was very likely part of the conspiracy and was told to say that... unless Oswald was the patsy and really had nothing to do with the assassination except to be setup, or at least nothing to do with the actual kill shot(s), if any shots were fired by him at all. Remember, he denied involvement and said he was setup, and then immediately he was silenced forever (or at least until the Day of Judgment of the wicked when God will bring the truth out before the entire universe).
 
 
+5 # Centrider 2013-11-27 02:01
I think all of you are overlooking the most likely conspirators - people who didn't like a Catholic President.

Don't know what Occam thought about the Earth, but I think if shown the evidence to the contrary, he would have concluded otherwise.

Good thing Julius Caesar didn't have the CIA, Cubans, mobsters, Geo. Bush, the Military-Indust rial Complex, and more. Else, William S. would have had a terrible time writing his play.
 
 
+11 # tomslockett 2013-11-27 02:53
Connally's grave should be exhumed, of course to answer this question. But it seems to me the most significant information in Carl Gibson's 11/22/2013 RSM article was the statement that documents were disclosed, after a legal battle to declassify information containing statements from chief Warren Commission Council J. Lee Rankin, a quote was revealed that Oswald "was employed by the FBI at $200 a month from September of 1962 up to the time of the assassination". There should be documentation for this. If not, there should be assurances that such sloppy record keeping has been corrected. It is virtually inconceivable that, unless it was subsequently destroyed, information verifying this is not documented in some kind of work papers, financial, or payroll records. If so, and it is determined that this information has been covered up, this alone would be enough to discredit the Warren Report. Eye witness reports are well known to be unreliable and, while technically possible, it seems unlikely that such a shot could have been fired at a trajectory to hit Kennedy and miss everyone else and all parts of the vehicle, every inch of which must have been thoroughly examined in great detail.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 21:07
...Or, intentionally and by design, should have been but probably wasn't. Also, the conspirators probably made all of that evidence that you speak of concerning Oswald's employment by the FBI disappear long ago; if it was ever on the books, which it probably wasn't. The same with evidence that he worked for "al(l) CIAduh(!)", which the latter also very likely made disappear long ago.
 
 
+22 # Gordon K 2013-11-27 02:58
A lot can be learned by moving past the forensics. For example, Col. Fletcher Prouty (CIA-Pentagon liason) wrote in Gallery magazine (a Playboy knockoff) in the 1970s that Secret Service protocols were violated: National Guard troops trained to augment Secret Service manpower weren't assigned to protect Kennedy in Dallas, and officers who tried to correct the apparent oversight were told to stand down. The same protocols dictated that the Vice President should never be in the same motorcade (for fear of a double assassination), and the motorcade should never slow below 44 miles-per-hour, since at that speed, "leading" a moving target is extremely difficult. Both of these rules were violated in Dallas. It's also worth considering why Allen Dulles--the CIA chief Kennedy fired--was a member of the Warren Commission.

All of this points to an inside job, a conspiracy (yes, we can use that word) from within the military-indust rial complex. Kennedy's rejection of the Joint Chiefs' Operation Northwoods (a false flag operation designed to provide justification for invading Cuba) probably didn't help, either.
 
 
+3 # PaineRad 2013-11-27 03:21
There is also no photographic evidence of Oswald firing the Carcano that day.
 
 
+16 # goodsensecynic 2013-11-27 05:28
Let's see: there are all sorts of suspects with all sorts of motives.

There is also a great deal of evidence that is missing (Kennedy's brain), known to have been destroyed (the doctors' notes from the ER in Dallas), obvious anomalies (the switched caskets on Air Force 1) and, of course, the film of Kennedy being pitched forward and the snapping back as he is hit by a bullet from behind and then by a bullet from the front.

Conspiracy theory? Of course not ... just a number of as yet unidentified but like-minded individuals pursuing a common project.

Was it organized crime? The CIA? The FBI? The NSA? Etc., etc., etc.? I don't know, but I do know this: Oswald was probably "set up" as the "patsy," but even if he wasn't, he certainly did not act alone.
 
 
+18 # goodsensecynic 2013-11-27 05:34
Incidentally, maybe I missed it, but in all the TV coverage of the 50th anniversary, I didn't see a single reference to the Senate Committee investigation of political assassinations in the USA (JFK, MLK, RFK), which refuted the Warren Report and concluded that there was ample evidence of a successful conspiracy to execute JFK (who, among other things, was apparently about to break up the National Security Agency - you know, the people who are tracking your phone calls today).
 
 
+11 # goodsensecynic 2013-11-27 05:35
Sorry, I neglected to mention that the Senate Committee in question was chaired by Frank Church of Idaho. You can look it up ...
 
 
-7 # Inspired Citizen 2013-11-27 07:17
"If Connally's clear recollection is correct, then the so-called "Magic Bullet Theory" falls apart and the Warren Commission is left with no basis for concluding that Oswald was the only shooter."

That's not true: 1st bullet hit Kennedy, second hit Connelly and the third hit Kennedy's head. The neuro surgeon who examined Kennedy as he was dying in the hospital reported an ENTRY wound in the back of the head. Three shots; one shooter.

There are a lot of unanswered questions, and there may have been a conspiracy. There is also the distinct possibility that LHO was the lone wolf assassin.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:26
So, you don't believe the Warren Commission.

The WC found that one bullet, the second one fired, hit JFK in the back, exited his throat, then hit Connally in the side, penetrated his chest, breaking the 5th rib, then exited his chest, entered his arm, shattering the radius bone, then exited his wrist and entered his thigh where it lodged.

Now, the WC claims that bullet (CE 399) fell out of Connally's leg and was found on a gurney in the hall at Parkland Hospital.

But, the surgeon who saved Connally's life said that bullet was still in Connally's leg AFTER the "magic bullet" had been found.
 
 
+11 # fredboy 2013-11-27 07:42
Then let's take a look at 9/11.
 
 
+1 # Pancho 2013-11-27 20:18
Look away, Freddy boy,

Nothing to see here.

Move along.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 21:14
I'm sure glad that's sarcasm. Or is it? Reading your other brainwashed comments it becomes clear that you're being serious. But you're oh so wrong! There's plenty of damning evidence in favor of a real 9-11 conspiracy having been perpetrated by the U.S. shadow government, and factions of the U.S. government, military and intelligence apparatus.
 
 
-12 # tclose 2013-11-27 08:35
I think it is a real problem for RSN to publish this kind of article. It only invites every conspiracy theorist to come out of the woodwork and present their opinion, which as we can all see are all over the map.

Please stick to political issues, not conspiracy theories.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-27 08:35
The single-bullet theory is correct, not because the Warren Commission said so but because numerous 3D computer models have confirmed that there was a straight-line trajectory from the 6th floor through the injuries of both men. The bullet found on the stretcher is the bullet that caused those injuries. The recent Nova "Cold Case" program proved that the M-C bullet fired from the M-C will sustain similar slight damage (no, it was not quite "pristine") when fired through soft tissue, gelatin, or even 3 feet of pine wood. Several other tests have demonstrated that bone, unlike pine wood, will cause said bullet to shatter into several pieces in a directly full impact, as happened with the fatal head shot. If the shot had been fired from the front or front-right, then the back or left of JFK's head would have sustained major damage from the exit wound. It did not.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:30
Why did the surgeon who saved Connally's life at Parkland state in a press conference that the bullet that had done all that damage to Connally was still embedded in his thigh AFTER the "magic bullet" was found on the gurney in the hall?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-CDLl82n-E
 
 
+1 # BobC 2013-11-27 19:46
From Dr. Shaw's Warren Commission testimony:
Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Shaw, permit me to ask you one or two more questions. Did you find any bullets in Governor Connally's body?
Dr. SHAW - No.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you find any fragments of bullets in his chest?
Dr. SHAW - No; only fragments of shattered rib.
Mr. SPECTER - And did you find, or do you know whether any fragment was found in his wrist or the quantity of fragments in his wrist?
Dr. SHAW - It is my understanding that only foreign material from the suit of Governor Connally was found in the wrist, although in the X-ray of the wrist there appeared to be some minute metallic fragments in the wrist.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-27 19:47
Apparently he was unaware that it had already been picked up from the stretcher, and he was making an assumption that the bullet was still in Connally's thigh since he (Dr. Shaw) had not yet removed it.
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 22:07
So the second bullet, which according to you and the WC caused all of Connally's wounds, including a shattered rib and wrist bone, should theoretically have shattered, but instead was found "almost" pristine on a stretcher at Parkland. Mind explaining how it hit those two bones and shattered them, but still was essentially undamaged by the impacts with solid bone?
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 22:58
Even the person in charge of the Bethesda autopsy, Admiral Hume, doubted that the bullet found on the stretcher was the one that struck Connally. Hospital personnel at Parkland also said that the stretcher in question had, they were virtually certain, not been the one Connally had occupied. Seth Kantor, a member of the White House press corps, said he encountered Jack Ruby at Parkland less than an hour after the shooting, and described their conversation and a handshake. The WC claimed he must be mistaken, and chose to believe the volatile nightclub owner when he denied the encounter had taken place [Kantor knew Ruby from his days as a Dallas reporter]; according to Kantor, after he published his 1978 book "Who Was Jack Ruby?", Burt Griffin, the WC attorney who developed the conclusion that Ruby had not been at Parkland, changed his mind and supported Kantor. If Ruby was in Parkland, could he have been there to casually drop the bullet later labeled the "magic bullet" [CE399] on a vacant stretcher?

[There is also evidence that Oswald recognized his assialant; Dan Rather, reporting from the basement of the police station where Ruby was shot, stated on the air that Oswald's eyes locked onto Ruby's and never left them until just before he was shot.]
 
 
+2 # About That 2013-11-27 10:06
Stand-up comedian Bill Hicks makes some very interesting points on this topic here >

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0bIRkv29xk
 
 
+8 # fredboy 2013-11-27 10:22
Please don't discount the "conspiracy theory" notion: a conspiracy is simply two or more people working together in an attempt to influence an outcome. As a veteran investigator I am often amazed by the idiots who immediately assume such activities are rare at best. When you think about it, just about every business, family, team, and enterprise could be labeled a conspiracy.
 
 
+5 # twocents 2013-11-27 10:26
If you want to know who killed Kennedy, "JFK and the Unspeakable" by Douglass is required reading. Ted Sorensen told me that everything in the book is accurate.
 
 
+2 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 08:02
Agreed. I'm less than halfway through it, but there's something eye-opening on pretty much every page, and all of the evidence he cites seems to make it pretty clear who was behind the assassination.
 
 
+5 # smilodon1 2013-11-27 10:47
Is anyone aware that the Dallas Police concluded that Oswald hadn't fired a rifle? Seem to me that might be slightly important.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-27 10:59
No one's aware of that, because it's not true.
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:35
The paraffin tests concluded that Oswald had residue on his hand that could be consistent with having fired a handgun, or touching the type of ink used in books.

But, it found no residue on his face, which is inconsistent with having fired a rifle.

Only one palm print alleged to be Oswald's was found on the rifle. No fingerprints on the rifle or shells.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-27 19:52
I'll have to look into this further, but isn't it possible that he washed his face after he returned to his rooming house, before getting his handgun and jacket and heading out to go for his last walk as a free man?
 
 
-1 # Pancho 2013-11-27 20:40
I've sat through a murder trial for weeks, recently.

An immense amount of forensic evidence was presented. Despite the recovery of a vehicle stolen by the killer, only two partials were found. They were lifted by "fuming" Superglue, a technique developed by accident by an Alaskan who came upon it by happenstance, like Alexander Fleming's discovery of lysozyme and penicillin.

Forty eight years after the assassination, the forensics team was only able to lift two partials from the victim's stolen truck. The partials were sent in to the FBI's lab and came back with a list of 25 best possible matches, with the actual killer, who was not a suspect at the time, on the top of that list.

Bob C. is right. Other areas of forensic science, even though "Abby" on NCIS really can't produce DNA matches in a matter of minutes, have advanced considerably. All the legit stuff advances the killing as the work of one guy, the one who tried to kill Walker (a deserving target, if ever there was one), the one who killed a decent cop at the theater afterward.

Occam's Razor. Think about it.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2013-11-27 11:12
Here's the press conference given by the surgeon who worked on Connally on 11/22/63. This was filmed AFTER the "magic bullet" was found on a gurney in Parkland Hospital.

The surgeon states that the bullet that hit Connally was still embedded in his thigh at that time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-CDLl82n-E
 
 
0 # mjc 2013-11-27 13:16
Heard a couple of forensic experts talking about the evidence from the assassination on NPR on the 22nd of November this year. They pretty much convinced me that the gun that was Oswald's COULD have fired the three shots and the people in the Book Depository just below where Oswald was stationed HEARD three shots. Their conclusion was that the first shot missed and that bullet casings were not recovered from street although certainly searched for. The third shot was the one that killed Kennedy. Think if there was a cover-up or evidence that Oswald was just an agent of SOME other organization... the Mafia, Cuban government, or a bunch of conservative guys who wanted an all out war in Vietnam...the evidence for "who done it?" has never been validated. There was much bungling in the autopsy and the handling of evidence like the car Kennedy...and the others rode in seems highly suspicious. The car was driven to Washington DC and stored in a garage for a time...A TIME??? Well, why? Gives detectives/hist orians a lot to chew on for many years. I never realized that Connally refused to have the fragments of the bullet(s?) removed for analysis, but that just adds to mystery.
 
 
+1 # BobC 2013-11-27 13:50
The tiny lead fragments that were recovered from Connally's wrist when he was alive matched the mashed end of the Mannlicher Carcano full-metal jacket bullet found on his stretcher. Why the conspiracy theorists would insist that his body be exhumed so they could examine more fragments from the same wrist is beyond me, unless it's just because they enjoy being a nuisance. They remind me of the people who demanded to see a copy of Obama's birth certificate. He produces it, but it's not good enough for them, so they demand the "original"; then Trump demands to see his academic records. It never ends.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2013-11-27 15:45
When one fires a metal jacketed round that does not have a jacket over the heel (your "mashed end") of the bullet, the hot, rapidly expanding gasses from gunpowder ignition melts and vaporizes some of the lead from the heel.

That vaporized lead must be cleaned from the chamber and barrel of the firearm. It's much harder to clean than the burned powder.

When a bullet strikes and shatters bones, and leaves lead fragments behind, that lead comes first from the nose of the bullet, and once the jacket has ruptured, from the sides.

CE 399's jacket is intact. The only lead missing merely demonstrates that round was fired, and ballistics tests showed it was fired from the Oswald rifle.
 
 
-1 # Pancho 2013-11-27 20:16
Precisely.

Thank you for this and preceding remarks.
 
 
0 # weezie2012 2013-11-27 16:22
There is available a three hour DVD of James Files confession to shooting Kennedy. It seems most plausible. Files claims to have been hired by Sam Giancana and he worked with other well known mob members that day. This was a sophisticated operation not a one man show. Files claims that he and Oswald had the same CIA controller and that Oswald helped him prepare for the shooting. Just maybe LBJ wanted to get into that Vietnam War and Kennedy didn't. LBJ worked for the Brown brothers, Brown and Root now a part of Halliburton. Files thought Kennedy was too weak to be president. He had trained the Cubans that went in at the Bay of Pigs and died and he was furious at that loss.
 
 
-3 # John S. Browne 2013-11-27 20:26
The problem, Bill Boardman, with the contention of your final paragraph of this article, is that if a "responsible authority" such as the FBI obtained the bullet fragment evidence, they're probably rule it "classified", seal it, refuse any independent testing of it, and/or cover it up. In fact, that's probably why they wanted to get a hold of it back in 1993, in order to prevent any possibility of any independent party or parties getting a hold of that evidence and getting it independently examined and tested.

So, the last so-called "responsible authority(ies)" that we want to get a hold of ANY of the evidence in the matter of JFK's assassination, is the FBI or ANY other federal government agency(ies). But that's far from the only way that your article is fraught with serious problems.
 
 
-3 # Pancho 2013-11-27 20:47
Reading these silly comments brings to mind all the nonsense surrounding the 9/11 strikes, the "Building 7" crap in particular.

The conspiracists imagine that not one single supposed co-conspirator ever got drunk and bragged about it in a bar, told his girl friend, left a note to be published after his demise, etc., etc.

Impossible.

But clearly, believable to those many deluded and delusional.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-27 21:13
My nominee for most ridiculous conspiracy theory of all time is that the Pentagon was hit by a rocket, not by an airplane. Oh really? Then where are the 54 people (not including the hijackers) who were on board the plane? Being kept prisoner in a cave, apparently.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-27 23:09
I'll have to assume that the people voting thumbs down on this post know where all those passengers are being held prisoner. Spill the details!
 
 
+6 # wmarcelle@earthlink.net 2013-11-27 22:21
You see PANCHO, here's the thing … the people who suspect that JFK'S death was a conspiracy are fully aware that GOVERNMENTS, like CORPORATIONS, lie all the time. But when you call those people delusional -- well -- I have to say that you don't seem to understand how the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT has operated for decades and decades. Did you know that it was the C.I.A. (under ALLEN DULLES), who plotted the coup against MOHAMED MOSADEGH in IRAN back in 1953? They did it with the help of BRITISH MI6 when MOSADEGH decided to nationalize IRAN'S OIL for IRAN. You see, PANCHO, this is what is known as a CONSPIRACY. Or how about DULLES and the C.I.A. PLOT to remove the democratically elected JACOBO ARBENZ from power in GUATEMALA. Another covert operation that was -- you guessed it -- a CONSPIRACY. There was also the removal and assassination of PATRICE LUMUMBA in the CONGO, -- this also began as a C.I.A. CONSPIRACY … and so on. The list is very long, PANCHO. CONSPIRACY, then ACTION. By the way, I think one of the most famous recent conspiracies was heralded by the phrase "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". I could argue with you about the fact that KENNEDY'S murder was a COUP DE'TAT in plain sight, but I won't. I'll just direct you to a rather very disturbing article in this week's ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE called "JFK VS THE WAR MACHINE" written by ROBERT KENNEDY'S son.
 
 
-5 # BobC 2013-11-27 23:02
Those are great examples of right-wing conspiracies committed by American right-wingers, who have a proud history of being generally awful people. But when you ignore the facts of this case --- i.e., that an American left-winger assassinated a cold-war president because he (the assassin) had run out of options to make his mark in this world --- you definitely come across as delusional.
 
 
+2 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 08:13
Wouldn't it make sense that if a right-wing organization was going to commit a crime in public, they would want to make the person who was going to take the fall look like a left-winger? That's what all the evidence shows about Oswald. He privately associated with a CIA handler and right-wing benefactors, while publicly pulling a variety of ridiculous stunts such as forcing himself into Fair Play for Cuba meetings, creating a public disturbance on their behalf, and going to Mexico to openly contact the Cuban embassy and offer them U.S. secrets.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-28 08:17
He openly railed against capitalism among all his family and friends. By his own admission, his association with right-wingers in New Orleans that summer was a failed attempt to infiltrate them. He tried to murder a right-wing general that April, and then told his wife what he had done.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-28 08:20
Just the timeline and random circumstances of how Oswald came to work at the Texas School Book Depository are proof positive that there was no conspiracy: http://theweek.com/article/index/251047/jfks-murder-was-not-a-conspiracy. It would not have been possible for any groups to know Oswald could be placed there on Nov. 22, even if the motorcade route had been known far in advance, which it wasn't.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-28 08:35
Speaking of random timelines, there's also the issue of Jack Ruby. If he was part of a conspiracy to silence Oswald, why didn't he do it on Friday night or Saturday when he was hanging around the police station? Then on Sunday, the scheduled transfer time was 10 a.m. At 10 a.m., Ruby was lounging around his living room, watching TV. He got the call from one of his strippers asking for money around 10:20, then went to the Western Union office to wire her the money. He actually waited in line at Western Union. Even though he had left his dog in the car, he then decided to walk into the police station before getting back into the car. By this time it was around 11:20. This was long after the scheduled time of the transfer, which was delayed only because the cops decided that morning to question Oswald further before transferring him. There was no way Ruby could have known exactly when Oswald would emerge from the door. Ruby got there just a few seconds earlier and acted on impulse. See http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Issues_and_evidence/Jack_Ruby/Logical_approach_to_Ruby.html.
 
 
+1 # BobC 2013-11-27 23:07
There were plenty of groups and individuals with a motive to kill JFK. That is probably true of most presidents but was perhaps especially true then. Does that mean they actually carried it out? No, it does not.
 
 
0 # Matt_OccupyEarth 2013-11-28 08:19
Why do we even need physical evidence of a second gunman? There is ample evidence that Oswald was a CIA operative for years leading up to the assassination. Doesn't that alone pretty much prove that he wasn't acting alone? Also, since it's pretty much self-evident that magic bullets do not exist, why is that considered a valid theory?
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-28 08:38
The CIA knew about him, but he was not an "operative". And the bullet was not "magic". That's why.
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 23:01
Quoting BobC:
but he was not an "operative".


And you know that how ....?
 
 
-1 # samiam 2013-11-28 11:59
Last Friday the 22nd of November, like many others, I watched programs dealing with the assassination.
In some of these programs there were interviews with a reporter by the name of Pierce Allman who
was in Dealy Plaza by the TSBD building at the time of the shooting. He said that moments after the three shots he ran to the TSBD and asked a man where the nearest phone was. The man was Oswald.
In all the time since the event in Dallas I had never read or heard anything about Pierce Allman's encounter with Lee Harvey Oswald. It has taken fifty years for this story to finally emerge.

The impression I got from Allman's statement is that he entered the TSBD building just seconds after he heard the rifle shots and met Oswald in the doorway. If what he says is true the whole case against Oswald has been destroyed. There is no way Oswald could have been on the first and sixth floors at the same time or made it to the first floor in such a short space of time.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-28 20:17
samiam, I first heard about that encounter more than 20 years ago. It happened not seconds after the shooting, but minutes. During those minutes, Oswald raced down the stairs from the 6th to 2nd floor and then nonchalantly got a drink from a vending machine. A cop confronted him, but a manager said, "No; he works here." Then Oswald went down to the first floor and encountered Allman while slipping out of the building. Very soon thereafter, the building was sealed and roll was taken; Oswald was the only employee missing.
 
 
0 # Activista 2013-11-28 20:38
Quoting BobC:
samiam, I first heard about that encounter more than 20 years ago. It happened not seconds after the shooting, but minutes. During those minutes, Oswald raced down the stairs from the 6th to 2nd floor and then nonchalantly got a drink from a vending machine. A cop confronted him, but a manager said, "No; he works here." Then Oswald went down to the first floor and encountered Allman while slipping out of the building. Very soon thereafter, the building was sealed and roll was taken; Oswald was the only employee missing.

Thank you BobC for patiently rebuking our "conspiracy" theorists ... they watch too much TV and logical thinking/object ivity is long gone....
What a waste of energy ... look at today news and conspiracies in progress .. Libya, Syria, Iran ...
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-28 21:12
The sad part is that I enjoy it, and the only reason I'm admitting this is because I'm still feeling a buzz from today's wine.
 
 
-1 # John S. Browne 2013-11-30 02:17
You know what, "Activista"? I thought you claimed to believe that 9-11 was an inside job; so, have you changed your mind; or why are crying "conspiracy theorists" all over the place? Do you think 9-11 is a conspiracy FACT, but not the JFK assassination? What gives? Perhaps there's far more evidence of 9-11 being an inside job conspiracy than there is that JFK's assassination was, but the gobs of evidence that the assassination of JFK was also an inside job conspiracy is quite telling. But you apparently choose to ignore it and believe the anti-conspiracy -FACT shill-trolls in this thread, and to believe the abundant lies over the abundant truth. Is it just that, like most "Amerikans", you can't believe that the U.S. government is THAT bad? Then how is it that you realize that the U.S. government is behind a great deal of evil in the world, and long has been, and yet you can't believe that they're also guilty of these other extreme evils? You need to make up your mind. Which side are you on? (And please don't respond with a bunch of bullshit typical responses of those who refuse to face that the U.S. really IS that evil.)
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-30 07:54
Maybe she's not so blinded by ideology that she'd be willing to ignore all of the facts all of the time, as you apparently are.
 
 
-2 # John S. Browne 2013-12-01 02:39
Talking about yourself there, Bob, not about me.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-12-01 07:52
Tell me, Mr. Browne, was Marina's friend Ruth Paine part of your precious conspiracy? She's the one who recommended that Lee interview for the job at the TSBD on October 15. She's still alive; seems like a nice lady --- you should ask her. How about her neighbor Linnie Mae Randall, whose brother worked there? She's the one who gave Ruth the idea. I guess we need to include Roy Truly, the boss at TSBD who neglected to check Oswald's references after the interview and thus hired him despite his horrible work history. Truly also decided, no doubt upon instructions from the CIA or Mafia, to place Oswald in Dealey Plaza instead of the company's other location. Let's not forget the Dallas Police Department, who decided to question Oswald for an extra 80 minutes on Sunday morning so Jack Ruby would have time to go to Western Union to wire $25 to one of his strippers before committing his contract murder. I guess I must be part of it too, since I'm a "shill" for these people, even though I was only 1 at the time. The web just grows and grows.
 
 
+1 # samiam 2013-11-28 13:11
Can anyone explain how it was that Oswald's closest friend while in Texas was George de Mohrenschildt an anti communist White Russian? And I don't mean the drink.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-28 20:25
Oswald's wife was Russian, and the Russian community in Dallas hung out together a lot. The gregarious de Mohrenschildt, by all accounts, found Oswald to be very entertaining with his never-ending anti-capitalist rants. Stephen King, in his novel "11/22/63" did an excellent job of delving into their odd "friendship", if you want to call it that. It is possible that de Mohrenschildt was working for the CIA to monitor Oswald's activities. The FBI also had an agent (James Hosty) in charge of keeping tabs on Oswald in Dallas. Neither the FBI nor the CIA did an adequate job of keeping track of him, obviously. This is where the Warren Commission screwed up, by ignoring the FBI's and CIA's failures (assuming the Commission knew about those failures), to avoid public embarrassment. Of course, the omission provided endless fodder for conspiracy nuts, which is probably worse than embarrassment.
 
 
0 # Activista 2013-11-29 13:23
"the commission provided endless fodder for conspiracy nuts, which is probably worse than embarrassment ...."
agree ... it is alarming how liberal educated people process information ... creating these conspiracy tales ..
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2013-12-03 23:03
Quoting BobC:
Oswald's wife was Russian, and the Russian community in Dallas hung out together a lot. The gregarious de Mohrenschildt, by all accounts, found Oswald to be very entertaining with his never-ending anti-capitalist rants.

So then why did he commit suicide just before he was scheduled to testify before the HSCA?
 
 
0 # Activista 2013-11-28 20:55
Please read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
makes more sense that the "conspirators" above.
 
 
-3 # brux 2013-11-29 23:24
You know, as I think about it, I think there might be one case I can think of where enhanced interrogation, water boarding, torture ... call it what you will, would have been right.

That was with Jack Ruby. I think that guy should have been tortured for weeks or months to find out what he knew about Kennedy's death. This guy had all kinds of odd connections to Nixon, Bush, Hunt, and witnesses in this case.

This is really the only time I can think of where torture would have been useful and necessary. Because he knew he was dying (the ticking bomb) and that he was just going to be left alone in jail to die, while whatever he did and whoever he was working with paid him off with whatever they agreed on.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-11-30 07:51
Brux, did you see what I wrote above about Jack Ruby's activities on Sunday morning while Oswald's transfer was being delayed? If he was being paid by someone to kill Oswald, why does all the evidence point to him acting on impulse? If he had taken the time to think rationally for a moment about the consequences, would he have gotten there late? Would he have left his dog in the car? It's apparent to me that in the seconds leading up to the shooting he thought he'd be hailed as a hero and spend Sunday night in his own bed.
 
 
0 # brux 2013-11-30 22:01
Your arguments as to motives are all pretty thin ... who knows what he was thinking or what he did, and what he planned or was planned for him? You cannot just assume Ruby was acting on impulse because of "something" ... and it's pretty clear, he wasn't late.
 
 
0 # BobC 2013-11-30 22:57
He got there with less than a minute to spare. Who plans in advance to kill someone, especially on someone else's orders, and then risks arriving late by dilly-dallying at a Western Union office? Once Oswald had been transferred to the jail, Ruby would have missed his opportunity. And there was literally no way Ruby could have known in advance, down to the minute, when Oswald would emerge from that door, given that the transfer was running approximately 80 minutes late.
 
 
-1 # BobC 2013-12-01 23:42
One thing I did not mention in any of my above comments: when the nerves explode inside someone's brain, the body's reaction is to straighten violently. This is why JFK's head lurched backward (in Zapruder frame 313) immediately after the slight movement forward (in frame 312), the latter being due to the force of the bullet striking from behind.
 
 
+2 # balconesfalk 2013-12-04 18:03
Sunday, July 14th, 2013 | Posted by Kevin Barrett
New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

Is this building falling or exploding? If you say “falling” you need to take your meds
by Kevin Barrett

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.
The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalis t” (anti-conspirac y) comments at news websites.
The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist .” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority...

Try to google it...
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN