Who shot JFK?

Having established that little green men swooped down can carried away flight MH370.... who killed JFK ??

I read an interesting obituary this morning which only fans the flames. I would value your opinions, especially from the much, who I am pleased to see has returned after a long break from the forum. I value his lucidity.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10796331/James-Tague-obituary.html

 

The answer is, "whatever floats your boat ". ( You must have an answer with a boat component to it ). I reckon Oswald is right in the thick of it, eyewitnesses saw him shoot the policeman, which is a strange thing to do if he wasn't !

 

It was pretty clearly a team work. The rest of the truth is probably dead and gone by now, together with the actors of this movie.
But we shouldn't exclude a possibility that one day a secret memoirs of a penitent member of the gang will pop up out of some dusty box during his son's relocation to a new houseboat.
Cheers

 

USSR...

Leave it at that...

 

The KGB allegedly believed Oswald was as thick as a brick and could not have carried it off, but I tend to think that makes it more likely it was him who did it, a man unable to comprehend the enormity of his actions, made for a steady hand on the trigger.

 

best book on the topic is "case closed". since boy hood I have read just about every book on this topic. Many are convincing, most contradict each other. I even found a copy of the Warran comission report and read it (you should too). I became confused, and did not know what to believe. Until I worked for a government contractor on classified military aircraft, and something struck me: you have too options to accept, 1) either it was a massive conspiracy involving many different people, different government agencies, and all did their tasks perfectly and left no evidence, and no one spoke out about it. Or 2), one disturbed individual with very strange ideas, a social misfit who had no friends, trying to make a name for himself bought a cheap surplus military rifle and took out the president.

After seeing how our government operates, I came to believe any conspiracy theory is just not plausible, our government (nor any other human organization) is just not that good at pulling off something this complex, and leave no evidence and have no eye witnesses. It comes down to this: massive government run perfect conspiracy, vs. one modestly skilled kook. which is plausible and more likely? kook. And "Case Closed" confined it for me (the only rational book on the subject, uses new scientific analysis tools).

Robert A. Heinlein's 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" stated what became known as "Heinlein's razor": "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity". and from England "Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory." —Bernard Ingham. and Aurthur Clarke "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice". Keep these in mind and you will almost always certainly be correct.

Humans are just not capable of pulling off the perfect conspiracy, but are capable of pulling off some really stupid mistakes.

 

Well, the wife angel of Hancock (Will Smith) knows for sure who killed JFK but she is not telling.

 

If it was a conspiracy, it was a small one.

Oswald was not in it, but he did shoot the president.

Sound goofy?

I think Oswald was an assassin of opportunity. He found out the motorcade was going to go right past his work place and he couldn't resist.

He had already tried to kill a radio talk show host.

The other assassin did no know anything about Oswald's plans, nor did Oswald no anything about him.

Oswald fires the first shot.

It enters the president's back, about shoulder height, then exits out his neck, ripping a massive whole in his trachea. The bullet (full metal jacket, military issue) continues its journey through governor Connally's chest, then into his wrist.

The limo driver hits the gas.

Oswald pulls the bolt forward to load another round.

He aims.

Just about when he is ready to pull the trigger, another shot rings out.

The back of the president's skull goes flying onto the deck lid of the limo.

Oswald involuntarily pulls the trigger and the third shot rings out. The bullet misses the limo and hits the street, knocking a sizable chip out of it.

Seeing that the president is mortally wounded, the second assassin has no reason to fir again. Instead, he melts into the crowd, gratified that a third shot came from somewhere else.

Oswald, seeing that he is not the lone assassin, decides to make a run for it.

He leaves the book warehouse before the authorities can enter.

They question his supervisor and do a quick nose count. Oswald is the only one, punched in, who is not present.

An All Points Bulletin is immediately announced.

Officer Tibbits soon hears it on his radio. Then he sees Oswald walking down the street. He challenges him.

Oswald, knowing that he has just been "made", has no choice but to surrender or shoot. He chooses the latter.

Possible paymasters for the second assassin, based on motive, minus likely down sides are:

1.) The CIA.

Motive: The president tried to cut their funding by about a third, due to them miss-informing him on on the likely prospects the Bay Of Pigs invasion.

Downside: They could get caught. Not likely. Though they suck at actual intelligence, they excel in "covert activities", especially against countries weaker than our own.

2.) The KGB.

Motive: To destroy Krushchev. He was getting too cozy, with Washington, in general, and The president in particular. Though he was probably trying to spare his country from nuclear annihilation, The "nomaclaturia" , those who led the 1917 revolution, had all been born in the 19th century, and probably could not wrap their minds around the idea of an unwinnable war.

Downside: World War III. Though they may have not been able to wrap their minds around an unwinnable war, they had lived through the winnable kind, which exacted a terrible toll on their country.

3.) The Mafia.

Motive: Stop the "war" on organized crime, which was being prosecuted by his brother Bobby, the Attorney General at that time.

Downside: A witch hunt against their members like they hadn't seen since the days of Mussolini, if their involvement is ever discovered. Tempting, but probably not worth the risk.

IMHO, the president would have ended up just as dead if either these gentlemen had gotten the flu that day and not shown up.

The Oswald inflicted wound had effectively slit the president's throat.

 

there is no need for another gun man, and no evidence for one.

there were three shots fired, three rifle casings found in the school book depository room where Oswald fired from, and two of the bullets were found, one in conelly's body. only three possible bullets were necessity to do the damage. all three casings were fired from Oswald's Carano rifle.

why invent the need for another gunman?

 

Because the president's head moves the wrong way in the film.

That has never been adequately explained. Just a bunch of "trust us, we're the experts".

The head moving back, instead of forward, is a violation of a principle of mundane physics known as "the conservation of momentum".

There is also the problem of a reporter of the time, one of the few originally allowed to see the film, told the American people that the president's head moved in the opposite direction that it actually does on that film.

Sorry. Unless someone comes up with a plausible explanation as to why the president's head moves the opposite direction of the bullet that supposedly hit it, I ain't buying. Not only that, but there's all that brain matter also moving in the wrong direction.

Watch the film.

 

There is an old story about LBJ, the night before, crowing to, IIRC, the Hunts at a party about how Kennedy wouldn't be a problem anymore.

Personally, I think a fair number of people had different reasons to either be involved or look the other way once the doing was done.

The mafia, to be sure, had it out for the brothers and some years ago someone who would have known had said the assassins were sourced from French Corsica in a plot involving more than the mob, and indeed it is claimed that this (hard to read) document ( http://history-matters.com/archive/...04-10434-10381/html/104-10434_10381_0002a.htm ) said to be obtained because of the FOIA indicates that a believed Corsican assassin was actually in Dallas on November 23rd, 1963.

 

The notion that there would be two independent assassins, not connected to each other in any way, shooting at Kennedy at the same location at the same time, is so improbable it cannot be taken seriously, imo. I agree with Petros, there is zero ballistic evidence other than that from Oswald's gun. Were there additional gunmen, extra shots would have been heard, and there would be evidence of people, cars, buildings, pavement etc being struck. There was none. If there was a team of assassins, they must have held their fire.

 

What about the accusation that JFK was incapable of making a decision on Bay of Pigs at the critical time because he was high on drugs? Hence the decision was taken to take him out.

 

Life is full of super improbabilities. People win the super lotteries, don't they. The odds against any one of them doing so are in the billions.

It appears much of the forensic evidence was miss-handled and/or lost.

The severity of the two wounds, on the president, were vastly different in severity. Hard to believe they were caused by the same kind of round, from the same weapon.

The first round pierces two bodies and remains mostly intact, leaving relatively small holes in the two victims.

The second round literally blows the president's head apart.

The first bullet was a full metal jacket, military issue, required by the Geneva convention, since some time in the '20's, after WWI. The second round appears (by the damage it caused) to be plain lead, to mushroom on impact, or even exploding.

 

Someone wins every lottery, if every minute of the day someone was taking pot shots at the prez, I'm sure there would be occasions when more than one would be doing it, but obviously in reality assassins attempt to murder American presidents but rarely, and the odds that more than one would be independently attempting it simultaneously is just vanishingly small, negligible you might say.