• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Axxman300 said:
And there wasn't one.

I know you won't read this because you can't read, and it's written by a combat vet, but for the grownups in the room it's nice, short breakdown of how suppressors do and do not work:

http://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/this-is-why-silencers-dont-really-exist-suppressors-do

The key to this article is that your defense is that not all gunshot wounds are like they are in Hollywood movies, and here the author strikes down the Hollywood version of a silencer.

*The comments section is full of b#tt hurt*

Worse, you have now put the CIA's "Assassination Manual" on the table, and they argue against using guns of any kind if you want to be successful. Guess what, you just proved that Oswald didn't have any CIA training.

Ouch.
Click to expand...


"Silencers go all the way back to the turn of the twentieth century, and a firearms expert for the Los Angeles Police Department told me that as of 1963 they were already sophisticated enough to "substantially diminish the report" of the weapon and to "alter or disguise the sound," such as to make it sound like "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer" or "the operation of machinery." He said silencers are effective, and shots at Kennedy from a weapon with the best silencer then available "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd" in Dealey Plaza. 54"

-Vincent Bugliosi, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
 
RoboTimbo said:
It's almost as if you'll need evidence for a suppressed weapon. Your fantasy land isn't evidence.
Click to expand...

How else would you interpret Connally's statements? Or the statements of the witnesses who described Kennedy's reaction to the first loud shot?
 
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells. Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
 
MicahJava said:
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells. Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
Click to expand...

Add one more thing to the list that you have no idea what you're talking about.

What is your hypothesis for what happened which accounts for a consilience of evidence?
 
MicahJava said:
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells. Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
Click to expand...

Cite a documented instance of a criminal policing their brass after a shooting.
 
MicahJava said:
How else would you interpret Connally's statements? Or the statements of the witnesses who described Kennedy's reaction to the first loud shot?
Click to expand...

I would interpret them as faliable as any witness testimony.

If all you have is your interpretation of subjective memories or subjective experience, then you don’t have anything to suggest a silenced weapon. All you prove is people disagree, and can be wrong.

When you can validate your actions interpretation with objective evidence, let us know:
 
MicahJava said:
I like how Connally's back wound was no more oval than Kennedy's small head wound.
Click to expand...

If you know anything about ballistics and this case, you will know that Oswald used 6.5 x 52 ammunition. The bullet head of this cartridge is 31mm long. A tumbling bullet travelling at low velocity (this is very important later, so remember it) can leave an entry hole anywhere between 6.5mm round, and 31mm elongated. The elongation of the hole depends entirely on the angle of attack of the bullet. If it has fully tumbled 180° or as far as 360°, it will leave a round hole, if it has tumbled about 90° or 270° it will leave a hole about 31mm wide. If the bullet has tumbles about 30°, 150°, 210° or 330° it will leave an elongated hole approx 15mm long. Connally's surgeon Dr. Robert Shaw measured the long axis of the original elliptical entrance wound at 1.5 cm (15mm)

However, when a bullet enters at high velocity, the dynamics are vastly different. The kinetic energy of the bullet is much, much higher (some estimates say that the single bullet that hit JFK in the back slowed down by as much as 60% before striking JC. However the bullet that struck JFKs head was at high velocity... supersonic in fact.

What you don't realize is that that full metal-jacketed bullets travelling at high velocity can produce a hole in skull bone that's slightly smaller than the bullet that produced them, while at the same time creating much larger temporary cavity or splash effect, which collapses back. Further, while the initial entry hole might be circular, the varying density and viscosity of the surrounding tissue may cause it to not collapse back evenly all around the entry point. I have observed this myself when hunting.... I hit the animal square on/side on, but the entry wound is oval.

The difference here is that with the low velocity of the bullet striking JC, the oval shape can only be caused by a tumbling bullet, while with the high velocity bullet, the oval shape can be caused ballistically by the reaction of the surrounding tissue.
 
MicahJava said:
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells.
Click to expand...

In Oswald's case..

1. hiding his rifle and policing his brass would have taken an extra few seconds... seconds he needed to get away. He did have the rifle poked out the window so he could not risk the possibility of having been observed (which in fact he was) and therefore, the Police quickly finding out where he was.

2. The rifle he use was cheap ($12?) so not worth taking away, and not worth the huge risk, not only of him being seen carrying a rifle, but that Police would shoot him on sight. To get away, he needed to be invisible/unnoticed by others in the building and outside it.

MicahJava said:
Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
Click to expand...

Because there is ZERO, NADA evidence for multiple shooters.

ALL of the real, legitimate, verified evidence points to a single shooter on the sixth floor of the TSBD, firing three shots, the first missed, the second and third didn't. ALL of the ballistic evidence supports this.

ALL of the other so-called evidence of multiple shooters and more than three shots is either existing evidence that has be re-characterised, distorted twisted or outright lied about, or it has been created out of whole cloth; in both cases by the nutcases who believe in this conspiracy.
 
MicahJava said:
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells. Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
Click to expand...

How do you interpret Oswald murdering officer Tippitt and attempting to murder more when he was caught in the theater?
 
RoboTimbo said:
How do you interpret Oswald murdering officer Tippitt and attempting to murder more when he was caught in the theater?
Click to expand...

I explained everything in June of last year:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11876801&postcount=401

I simply can't believe that I've missed this all these years!

After examining the various photos and drawings and a review of my own extensive archives, I've come to the conclusion that not only is The Great American Lee Harvey Oswald innocent, The "red spot" on JFK's head wasn't a impact wound and JFK was not killed by gunfire.

It is the burn mark left by an early, highly classified laser aiming device later adopted as the PEQ15A, based on technology adapted from UFO's stored at Area 51. (confirmed by John Lear)

The early versions had the undesirable side effect of cooking the target from the inside-out before the target could be shot. That side effect is much like the cousin of the PEQ unit, the microwave oven. (Confirmed by Irwin Corey)

In the conspiracy to frame poor Lee, he was encouraged to bring his rifle to work so he could fire celebratory gunfire out the window at the TSBD to celebrate JFK's arrival in Dallas. (Confirmed by Oliver Stone)

At the moment that Lee fired his Carcano out the window on the sixth floor, not even aiming at anyone, he got excited and was too carried away to notice that people didn't understand he was happy firing, not mad firing. (confirmed by many witnesses)

While that was happening, Richard Nixon, Bebe Rebozo, Lyndon Johnson and Sonny Liston were on the roof of the Dal-Tex building with the PEQ. The early unit was extremely heavy, and it had to be held by Sonny. Nixon and Rebozo worked the hand-crank for power and the unit was aimed and fired by Johnson. (Confirmed by Sonny Liston in his autobiography, I ain't got no dog-proof ass.)

When JFK felt the first burn of the highpowered laser he thought his tie was too tight and went to loosen it, but at that moment Sonny got a good look at Jackie and got distracted and moved a bit, causing Johnson to lose his sight picture and the laser hit JFK square in the head. It only took a fraction of a second for his head to pop like a ripe melon. The explosion was so vicious that one of the filings in his tooth popped out and went right through Connally. (Confirmed by autopsy expert, Dr. Bombay)

When poor Lee saw that, he thought he might be in trouble, so he hid his rifle and decided to go home. (Confirmed by lunchroom lady)

Meanwhile, for the four men on the Dal-Tex roof, it was mission accomplished. Nixon ended that JFK Punk, Rebozo had blackmail material on Nixon and Johnson. Johnson was going to be the President, and now that Jackie was single...Sonny asked Johnson if he could take a few years off from paying his federal taxes. Johnson called him the N word and told him to carry the PEQ. Sonny kicked Rebozo in the nuts. (Liston, I ain't got no dog proof ass)

Lee was confused. All he ever wanted was to make happy noise in honor of his President, but all these people were screaming, crying, sirens. He thought there must really be something wrong, and he decided to go back to his place and get his Smith & Wesson revolver...just in case. (Lunchroom lady, psychic communication 1)

After he retrieved his handgun, he was walking down the street when somebody who was probably pretending to be a cop tried to stop him. Lee was an American who knew his rights, so when the maybe fake cop told him to stop, he kept going. Then when the cop yelled at him he stopped, but he could tell the maybe fake cop was nervous, and real cops shouldn't be nervous, so he shot him. (Lunchroom lady, psychic communication 2)

Lee thought it might be a good time to take in a movie. Being a big Audie Murphy fan, he noticed that War is Hell was playing and slipped in to watch. (Lunchroom lady, psychic communication 3)

The next thing he knew, and he was only watching a movie, what could be wrong with watching a movie? a bunch of cops showed up and came after him! He tried to show them that he was carrying a gun like one of the good guys, but they didn't seem to like that. (Lunchroom lady, psychic communication 4)

After that he got roughed up, locked up, nobody seemed to like him, and just like that a little fat guy shot him for no reason! How's that fair?

XXXXXXXXXXXX

OK, that's it. Forget all the other speculation. That's the true tale and since none of you can prove me wrong that's what really happened.
 
MicahJava said:
I like how Connally's back wound was no more oval than Kennedy's small head wound.
Click to expand...

I note how you introduce red herrings into the conversation when stuck. And how frequently you do it. And how often you ignore points you cannot respond to.

Hank
 
Axxman300 said:
The sad thing is that it's not his idea.

Hank can name the culprit, he posted on an older JFK thread here, and was soundly crushed.
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean Robert Harris.

It's not an idea original to Harris either. Other conspiracy theorists have conjectured silencers to get around the pertinence of over 90% of the witnesses hearing three shots, and only three shots.

As one witness put it, "three shots - no more, no less".

The suggestion of suppressed gunshots goes back almost as far as the assassination itself.

The evidence for it is still none existent.

Hank
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
"Silencers go all the way back to the turn of the twentieth century, and a firearms expert for the Los Angeles Police Department told me that as of 1963 they were already sophisticated enough to "substantially diminish the report" of the weapon and to "alter or disguise the sound," such as to make it sound like "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer" or "the operation of machinery." He said silencers are effective, and shots at Kennedy from a weapon with the best silencer then available "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd" in Dealey Plaza. 54"

-Vincent Bugliosi, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
Click to expand...

Still not evidence that a silenced weapon or weapons were used.

I pointed out what you need multiple times already.

"If you want to explain away unheard shots by unseen assassins firing unseen weapons that caused unseen damage, well, wouldn't it be simpler to just explain away these unheard shots by saying they weren't fired?

If you want to argue for actual shots, then you need some evidence, not just conjecture and speculation and logical fallacies.
1. Let's see the link to this supposed "CIA manual on assassination".
2. Let's see the eyewitness testimony for other assassins.
3. Let's see the other bullets that were fired.
4. Let's see the evidence for the CIA's involvement in the assassination.
5. Let's see the evidence for suppressed shots (hint: It's not "well, nobody heard them, so ergo, they must have been suppressed!").
6. Show the damage to JFK in the autopsy evidence and from the autopsy report and the HSCA forensic panel report of what these bullets struck, if anything. Or to Connally in Connally's Parkland medical records.
7. Wouldn't it be simpler to just explain away these unheard shots by unseen assassins firing unseen weapons that caused unseen damage by saying there weren't any?"

You still haven't provided it.

Hank
 
MicahJava said:
How else would you interpret Connally's statements? Or the statements of the witnesses who described Kennedy's reaction to the first loud shot?
Click to expand...
The governor was being shot at and was hit. His recollections are suspect.
 
Axxman300 said:
The sad thing is that it's not his idea.

Hank can name the culprit, he posted on an older JFK thread here, and was soundly crushed.
Click to expand...

I was here for the Robert Harris months. And the idiot Robert Prey, and the idiot roundhead, and the idiot 7forever, and the other social failures.
 
MicahJava said:
Hank, in the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells.
Click to expand...

And in the real world, unicorns and leprechauns leave no trace of themselves either. You might as well be arguing for the existence of those as well. Or perhaps you are. Did a leprechaun shoot JFK from the Dal-Tex building while a unicorn acted as a spotter?

Harris tried that same nonsensical argument two and a half years ago (July of 2015):
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10757814&postcount=3173
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10757984&postcount=3180

From the first link above:
Originally Posted by HSienzant
In this post, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10748978&postcount=2577 you admitted there's no evidence of a shooter in the DalTex building, and then tried to make head-scratching meaningless excuses for why not. Like the building was never searched. But that's an excuse, not an explanation for why this weapon was never seen.

My explanation doesn't invoke multiple shooters that arrive unseen, fire unseen weapons, hit the President but leave no damage to the body discernible to the autopsists, leave no fragments behind that are traceable to any weapons but Oswald's, and then vanish into thin air.

Do you have any evidence, for example, of the Dal-Tex shooter and weapon you conjecture? No.

The weapon is never seen brought into the building,
The weapon is never seen fired from the building,
The weapon's bullet(s) cause(s) no discernible damage,
The weapon's bullet(s) leaves(s) no discernible remnants of bullet(s) behind,
The weapon is never seen removed from the building,
The weapon is never found within the building after the shooting.

Gee, almost like the weapon never existed at all.

In fact, exactly like the weapon never existed at all.

That's a better explanation than yours.
Click to expand...

Apparently you are branching out. You're going to recycle not only your own failed arguments, but all of Robert Harris failed arguments as well. You should have read the thread when you were advised to. Your argument here makes no more sense than the same argument when it was advanced by Harris in the third of these threads.

So you've got, as evidence of the other shooter(s) with silenced weapons, all this:
(a) Unheard weapons
(b) Unseen assassins
(c) Unseen weapons
(d) Unseen shells
(e) No bullets traceable to another weapon other than Oswald's
(f) No fragments traceable to another weapon other than Oswald's
(g) No damage to either victim that could be traced to another weapon other than Oswald's
(h) No damage to the limousine or anything else in Dealey Plaza that could be traced to another weapon other than Oswald's

Wow, that is a lot of "evidence" for a second shooter. Correct me if I missed any of your "evidence".

And you think a silenced weapon is a better explanation than no weapon because "shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells"?

Yeah, we saw that at Columbine. And the Texas Tower shootings. And in Vegas. And in the theatre in Aurora, Colorado. And at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. And in Sandy Hook.

And when someone robs a convenience store, they never brandish a weapon, and if they do shoot, they always stop to pick up their shells.

And of course, every drive-by shooting in every major city in the country happens that way. That's how those guys are apprehended, when they stop their car to look for their shells (also why nobody is ever killed in a drive by shooting. It's tough to fire accurately when you're holding the gun in your lap and shooting through the closed door).

You're right. In the real world, shooters hide their guns and pick up their shells.

I just have one question: What real world are you talking about? It's not this one.



MicahJava said:
Why do you not consider forensic evidence like anatomical wound locations evidence for multiple shooters?
Click to expand...

Did you ever see the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy? There is solid evidence for them as well. Didn't you ever see a colored egg on Easter or find a dime under your pillow where you left your tooth the night before?

Hank

PS: I know you're still searching for that second shooter as earnestly as someone looking for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, but you will never find either. Because there is no end of the rainbow and no pot of gold. And there was no second shooter.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom