I don't hate to be the one to use facts, I revel in them........
tieler said:
Hate to be the guy who has to bolster his arguments with little things like facts, but George Bush, GW's daddy, was NOT on the warren commission. Gerald Ford is the former President, though not at the time of course, who served on the Warren Commission. I'm hoping it is just a mistake. I'll give you guys the benefit of the doubt.
One interesting thing about this issue is how everyone automatically assumes that we would have been "better off" if JFK had lived, meaning no Vietnam, Civil Rights would have gone through smoothly, no civil unrest. This is a nice thought but there are plenty of reasons to assume that things would have gone he same. As for Vietnam, LBJ went into Vietnam on the advice of Robert McNamara. McNamara is the main architect of the Vietnam war. McNamara was a Kennedy man through and through. Mcnamara pushed the war, and there is no indication that JFK would have opposed his main advisors plans. Kennedy gets the credit for Civil Rights, but it was LBJ who pushed through the legislation in 1965. Kennedy was notoriously slow in supporting Civil Rights, the great march on washington took place during Kennedy's administration. You don't march on the government if you think they are doing the right thing. I think a lot of the same things would have happened had Kennedy lived. He would have passed the Civil Rights bill, eventually, and he would have gone forth in Vietnam. And we would have still lost. But that is just my opinion.
As far as the assassination, again, it was possible for Oswald to have fired three shots in that time span. No one disputes that he could have "fired" three shots. Its whether or not they hit Kennedy that is the question. 100 yards, and I believe it was less, is a decent distance, but it does not require one to be an excellent shot. Kennedy was moving, but at a very slow pace and in a relatively straight manner. It can be done.
Talking of facts tieler, you remember that four hour crack on the 9/11 planes? Part 4 is nearly finished so if you want proof that I can occasionally stumble into lucidity, it'll be there. I think I also have a list of all the members of the Warren Commission somewhere. At least one of them is of extreme portent.
Anyway, back to the topic.....
There was a time frame established of something point something seconds during which all shots involved in the assasination took place. This was established by a microphone mounted on a police motorcycle that was there I think, for monitoring crowd noise. It was worked out that a man firing and aiming at maximum pace could fire only 3 shots in that time frame. (Possibly where you got the misapprehension that we were doubting that 3 shots had been fired tieler, I'm actually certain that it was about 5.) So three shots had to be the amount fired for the Warren Commission's report to stand up to the evidence recorded by the microphone. One of them was already accounted for by James Teague, because it struck the bridge at the far end of Dealey Plaza and sent splinters of stone into one of his cheeks. (In all possibility the angle dictates that this shot was probably fired from one of the lower 3 floors of the Dal-Tex Building; it's practically a miracle that one fired from the top floors of the Book Depository could have taken that angle, particularly as this was supposed to be the "ranging shot" that was fired first when the Limo was closest to Oswald's "nest", and the Limo was farthest from the bridge with the steepest angle error for it to hit the bridge. Being fired last would make it more likely because the Limo would've been more in Oswald's line of sight from the window.)
So with one fired already at the overpass, the remaining 2 had to account for all the wounds in Kennedy and Connelly. One of these was the fatal head shot that killed the Pres. An interesting note is that the alleged entry wound for the fatal head shot, was about 6 times bigger than the exit wound. Ask anyone like areenactor or Neutron that have served in the armed forces or poilce and have had training in the use of firearms (or to a lesser degree, myself) and they'll tell you that one has to resort to the fabled "theoretical physics" to explain such a thing. The smallest head wound was somewhere in the vicinity of Kennedy's right eyebrow and the larger occupied most of the rear right hand side of his skull. A trauma pattern like that is far more consistent with a shot fired from the front, with the wound at the back (the bigger one) being the exit wound. The travel of the bullet also exhibited behaviour consistent with the entry angle being on a trajectory that was only slightly higher or on an even level with the target. Given that Oswald was allegedly both behind and about 6 floors above street level, you've got one hell of a puzzle if one seeks to pin it on him. One also has to wonder at a couple of puzzling anaomalies if there is no conspiracy. It was discovered by the DA of New Orleans office that the Zapruder film had been tampered with at some point. They weren't sure why until they examined it closely and discovered that two frames had been swapped around. Coincidentally enough these two frames were the ones that showed Kennedy's head ripping open like a melon and then snapping backwards. Once tampered with they showed his head falling forwards, as it would have done with a strike from behind. (Magically re-forming his skull into one piece in the process.) Now I've heard several theories proposing ways that could have caused Kennedy's head to leap backwards in the same direction as the bullet strike that killed him; quite frankly I've never heard of one of them being used anywhere else. And just how many people here like Steve and Mike know of someone violently throwing themselves in the same direction as a bulltet strike that hit them? Theoretical biological physics this time. Just how many elephants have you seen hanging from a cliff with their tails tied to daisies? (Thanks Kev!
😀) Also, why would the frames have been tampered with in the first place? No explanations, only more questions...
But if you accept this explanation, then you have two wounds in Kennedy (in the back and the throat) and 5 in Connolly (back, ribs, two on his right wrist and one on his left leg) that had to be explained by a single bullet. For those who havn't read Jim Garrison's autobiographical account or seen the film, this was how they explained it. The so-called "Magic Bullet" theory.
Governor John Connolly was sitting in the front of the car and Kennedy was immiediately behind him. The bullet left the sniper's nest in the Book Depository and hit Kennedy high in the back. It travelled downwards into his cest cavity, changed direction by about 45 degrees and headed upwards; it emerged from the front of his throat, leaving a wound that is obviously an entry wound to anyone who knows anything about ballistics. It then travelled half the distance between Kennedy and Connolly and turned downwards to enter Gov. Connolly's back. It emerges from the front of his body, turns right and enters his right wrist, comes out the other side and turns in an almost 180 degree angle to finally embed itself in his left thigh. If one accepts all this, then the Warren Commission is telling us that eight miracles of theoretical physics occured in the space of a few seconds; the bullet hitting Kennedy's head left an entry wound the size of an exit wound and an exit wound the size of an entry wound (2), the Magic Bullet left an exit wound the size of an entry wound in Kennedy's throat(3), it spontaneously changed direction a total of 4 times(7), before being found on a stretcher at the hospital with barely a scratch on it (8), despite it being obvious that a bullet travelling through only one limb of a body is deformed almost beyond recognition. The issue of even a mediocre marksman getting off three shots is not in dispute. 3 shots was the maximum he could have gotten off in the timeframe provided by the annoying police microphone. Once they had the number 3, they had to come up with the most preposterous theory ever to explain all the wounds. Those wounds make it pretty obvious to most that there must have been far more than three shots fired. Also the different angles and ballistics evidence (and not forgetting that every bullet was fired during the time it would've taken one man to fire three times)make it obvious that there was more than one sniper. I'd say there were three personally, as even two shooters stretches it a bit. Given the witness statements I'd say there was between 5 and 7 shots fired in total.
1/ The fatal head shot, fired from the front and right of the Limo.
2/ A shot fired from the lower floors of the Dal-Tex building that travels the length of Dealey Plaza and hits the railway overpass, hitting James Teague with flying fragments of concrete.
3/ A shot fired quite possibly from the Depository that struck Kennedy in the back.
4/ A shot that hit Connelly in the back, coming out of his chest; probably fired from the Depository.
5/ A shot that hit Connolly in the wrist, going on to wound him in the leg.
6/ A shot that hit Kennedy in the throat from the front and gave him the wound you see him holding on the Zapruder film when the Limo emerges from behind the road sign.
7/ A second shot that missed the car altogether and drove a rut into the grass on the opposite side of Elm street from the grassy knoll; described by two or three eye-witnesses.
So there's the dispute about the number of shots; not that Oswald couldn't have gotten off three rounds, because he could've. The dispute is that it's impossible to say that only three shots caused all the wounds to the three men and drove the runnel into the lawn.
Another thing to remember is that not only was Oswald a crap marksman (far too crap to achieve a performance akin to shooting the bollocks of a gnat from 265 feet - the range to the Limo from the Depository, including allowance for the declination) but the rifle he is alleged to have used was a cheap pile of Italian shite. A Mannlicher-Carcano rifle is no Haskins five-oh or Barrett light fifty. It's not even in the same class as a Dragunov or L96 such as is used by the sniper platoons of British infantry battalions. It's cheap, shoddy and inaccurate.
Well that's enough to be going on with for a while. I'll have to see where that reference stuff is, because I havn't managed to find it yet.
Hi Joby!!) you boy-toys are clamouring all over yerselves, pissin' on each other in an attempt ta see who can show off first wit yer conspiracy theories...
...and so forth.
