Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VIII

[ahhell]

I was considering starting thread on the following musing regarding conspiracy theories.

I'm listening to an interview, and it starts off with my skepti-sense tingling but...The short version this women thinks the FBI was involved in the Oklahoma City Bombing. The acorn from which her ideas have grown are that:

A. The FBI was running an operation in the early called ProCon, which was a systematic infiltration of the right wing militia movement.
B. This included groups that McVeigh and Terry Nichols were involved in.
C. The FBI either egged on McVeigh or even more.

A lot of "facts" are covered in the interview about various coincidences and connections that may or may not be meaningful.

The thing is A, B, and C are totally things the FBI has done in other cases. Most of the successful prosecutions for terrorism in the last 20 years have involved almost as many FBI agents and Informants as actual conspirators and lots of folks that its questionable if they could have gotten close to doing an damage without law enforcement helping them out.

Now this women is pretty squirrely about what she things the FBI actually did but it definitely includes murdering at least one witness and possible that McVeigh was an agent of the FBI, CIA, or Pentagon.

Anyrate, the short version, the US government has done lot of shady ◊◊◊◊ that lends some credibility to at least some of the conspiracy theorizing. Granted this woman also believes in the JFK conspiracy so there's that but the notion that McVeigh was only as dangerous as he was because he was enabled by law enforcement screwing up, not crazy. Still, there are some conspiracy theories that are true. Cointelpro, US and UK involvement in Iran. Gulf of Tonkin.

 

[Axxman300]

I think there is an OKC Bombing thread here already.

The thing is A, B, and C are totally things the FBI has done in other cases. Most of the successful prosecutions for terrorism in the last 20 years have involved almost as many FBI agents and Informants as actual conspirators and lots of folks that its questionable if they could have gotten close to doing an damage without law enforcement helping them out.

The devil's in the details. By the 1990s infiltrating right-wing militias was not as easy as it had been in the decade before. High profile prosecutions led to tighter security within the groups that have their crap together. The LA Riots and the election of Bill Clinton to the White House made them double-down. In recent years we've seen the scenario you discuss but those involved are idealistic morons, low hanging fruit.

A. The FBI was running an operation in the early called ProCon, which was a systematic infiltration of the right wing militia movement.
B. This included groups that McVeigh and Terry Nichols were involved in.
C. The FBI either egged on McVeigh or even more.

The problem was McVeigh wasn't part of a group or militia. He and Bill Nichols built the bomb. His old roommate, Michael Fortier was part of the Viper Militia in Arizona, and Fortier knew about the plot (and was convicted). The follow-on investigation of the Viper Militia led to a host of criminal conviction: https://www.atf.gov/our-history/historical-articles/viper-militia

McVeigh was a loser. He left the Army after failing Special Forces selection (SFAS) in the first week instead of staying in and re-applying. He had gambling debts, couldn't keep a job, etc. In short, the kind of guy who believes in CTs.

Terry Nichols is still alive. You'd think he'd have said something by now. McVeigh had the death penalty so there was no reason for him not to lay out the details.

At the end of the day McVeigh was on nobody's radar. Lee Oswald should have been on the Secret Service's radar but the FBI crapped the bed. The only things they have in common are they were military vets who had unhappy lives, lacked personal responsibility, blamed the government for their problems, and had the will to commit violence.

 

[MicahJava]

Axxman, you think Terry Nichols hasn't spoken out about a conspiracy? Clearly you are too ignorant about this topic to be speaking about it. Terry Nichols, according to the official story, is lying about his confessions to a wider conspiracy.

 

[MicahJava]

Below is my latest work-in-progress essay on the "Lone gunman, double bullet" theory:



It may be technically possible to argue against the Single Bullet Theory while still blaming a lone gunman firing a 6.5 Carcano. An ordinary 6.5 round may have enough energy to move relatively straight through bone structures, but a shooter trying to conceal themselves might try to lower the noise by modifying the powder charge of their rounds, which would also lower it’s velocity. A gunman might also believe that lower velocity rounds would be more deadly for the situation being planned, or they might want to plant evidence with a bullet that doesn’t fragment into pieces too small to trace it’s rifling marks back to the gun. One form of modification is to use a sabot, made of metal or disposable plastic, in a shell casing to fire a round of ammunition smaller than the rifle it is being fired from, such as a 7.65 casing being used to fire a 6.5 round. Theorists have pointed out the possibility that a sabot can be used to fire a round that has already been fired, if the round has not been too deformed, and it would keep the rifling marks of it’s first firing. An unintentional short shot or “misfire” could also travel with reduced velocity. A lower velocity round fired at a person could enter and barely have enough velocity to exit, or even enter without exiting while still making a piece of shrapnel or bone exit the body. Parkland hospital’s Dr. Ronald Jones suggested that if Kennedy’s throat wound was not an exit, it also looked like it could’ve been made by a bone fragment or a bullet exiting at very low velocity. The shell casings in evidence should be examined to check whether there are any signs of them being fired with a reduced power charge. If we posit that Connally was struck in the back at Zapruder frame 222-224, then one might try to argue that Kennedy was hit around z180-190, as he was waving or lowering his hand. Since Zapruder’s camera ran at an average of 18.3 frames per second, a gunman firing at z180 would only have 2.29508196721 seconds between that time and z222, and if at z190 it would be 1.74863387978 seconds. The FBI reported that it took a minimum of 2.3 seconds to cycle the rifle bolt, aim and fire at target. The fragment of lead on the curb, associated with witness James Tague, could be explained as shrapnel from the head shot, which was suggested by the FBI’s documents. It is not clear why there was a common notion that the curb mark could’ve been caused by a whole 6.5 round hitting it – a 6.5 round would be expected to take a noticeable portion of cement, as demonstrated in a TV special. This sequence may seem to heavily contradict the abundance of three-shot witnesses who recalled the last two shots being closer together, as there were almost five seconds between z222 and the head shot at z313. This strong point of witness evidence was even acknowledged in the Warren Report. But there may be some fair questions to ask on the witnesses’ sequence, assuming a lone gunman firing three shots: Could it be possible that some of those who reported hearing three loud shots really only heard two loud shots, with one less loud followed by two louder and more echoey, the last echoing in a way that sounded like two? Could it be possible that the sound of the impact on Kennedy’s skull created a noise loud enough to be mistaken for a separate gunshot?

Another possibility to consider is that a lone gunman could have used a semi-automatic or automatic weapon while attempting to frame the official 6.5 Carcano and it’s shell casings. A semi-automatic or automatic rifle can rapidly fire a combination of low and high velocity rounds, and it may be possible for a witness to mistake the sound of a high-velocity shot followed by a low-velocity shot for a single shot. If somebody at this point still wanted to try arguing that Oswald killed Kennedy, they might raise the possibility that he was attempting to plant problematic evidence against himself to mislead investigators and foil the prosecutor’s case against him. Oswald had allegedly declared the backyard photographs to be fakes and that he could prove exactly how they were faked, and some conspiracy theorists have suggested the possibility that Oswald himself constructed the fake photos for some strange reason. In this shooting scenario, Oswald would have planted the unused 6.5 Carcano and it’s three shell casings, then fired several automatic shots, pocketed the real shell casings from the automatic, then smuggled out the automatic or left it in a hiding place.

 

[smartcooky]

Below is my latest work-in-progress essay on the "Lone gunman, double bullet" theory:



It may be technically possible to argue against the Single Bullet Theory while still blaming a lone gunman firing a 6.5 Carcano. An ordinary 6.5 round may have enough energy to move relatively straight through bone structures, but a shooter trying to conceal themselves might try to lower the noise by modifying the powder charge of their rounds, which would also lower it’s velocity. A gunman might also believe that lower velocity rounds would be more deadly for the situation being planned, or they might want to plant evidence with a bullet that doesn’t fragment into pieces too small to trace it’s rifling marks back to the gun. One form of modification is to use a sabot, made of metal or disposable plastic, in a shell casing to fire a round of ammunition smaller than the rifle it is being fired from, such as a 7.65 casing being used to fire a 6.5 round. Theorists have pointed out the possibility that a sabot can be used to fire a round that has already been fired, if the round has not been too deformed, and it would keep the rifling marks of it’s first firing. An unintentional short shot or “misfire” could also travel with reduced velocity. A lower velocity round fired at a person could enter and barely have enough velocity to exit, or even enter without exiting while still making a piece of shrapnel or bone exit the body. Parkland hospital’s Dr. Ronald Jones suggested that if Kennedy’s throat wound was not an exit, it also looked like it could’ve been made by a bone fragment or a bullet exiting at very low velocity. The shell casings in evidence should be examined to check whether there are any signs of them being fired with a reduced power charge. If we posit that Connally was struck in the back at Zapruder frame 222-224, then one might try to argue that Kennedy was hit around z180-190, as he was waving or lowering his hand. Since Zapruder’s camera ran at an average of 18.3 frames per second, a gunman firing at z180 would only have 2.29508196721 seconds between that time and z222, and if at z190 it would be 1.74863387978 seconds. The FBI reported that it took a minimum of 2.3 seconds to cycle the rifle bolt, aim and fire at target. The fragment of lead on the curb, associated with witness James Tague, could be explained as shrapnel from the head shot, which was suggested by the FBI’s documents. It is not clear why there was a common notion that the curb mark could’ve been caused by a whole 6.5 round hitting it – a 6.5 round would be expected to take a noticeable portion of cement, as demonstrated in a TV special. This sequence may seem to heavily contradict the abundance of three-shot witnesses who recalled the last two shots being closer together, as there were almost five seconds between z222 and the head shot at z313. This strong point of witness evidence was even acknowledged in the Warren Report. But there may be some fair questions to ask on the witnesses’ sequence, assuming a lone gunman firing three shots: Could it be possible that some of those who reported hearing three loud shots really only heard two loud shots, with one less loud followed by two louder and more echoey, the last echoing in a way that sounded like two? Could it be possible that the sound of the impact on Kennedy’s skull created a noise loud enough to be mistaken for a separate gunshot?

Another possibility to consider is that a lone gunman could have used a semi-automatic or automatic weapon while attempting to frame the official 6.5 Carcano and it’s shell casings. A semi-automatic or automatic rifle can rapidly fire a combination of low and high velocity rounds, and it may be possible for a witness to mistake the sound of a high-velocity shot followed by a low-velocity shot for a single shot. If somebody at this point still wanted to try arguing that Oswald killed Kennedy, they might raise the possibility that he was attempting to plant problematic evidence against himself to mislead investigators and foil the prosecutor’s case against him. Oswald had allegedly declared the backyard photographs to be fakes and that he could prove exactly how they were faked, and some conspiracy theorists have suggested the possibility that Oswald himself constructed the fake photos for some strange reason. In this shooting scenario, Oswald would have planted the unused 6.5 Carcano and it’s three shell casings, then fired several automatic shots, pocketed the real shell casings from the automatic, then smuggled out the automatic or left it in a hiding place.

Incomprehensible wall-o-text...TL;DR

 

[Axxman300]

Axxman, you think Terry Nichols hasn't spoken out about a conspiracy? Clearly you are too ignorant about this topic to be speaking about it. Terry Nichols, according to the official story, is lying about his confessions to a wider conspiracy.

And what exactly is this "official story" you clowns keep referring to? In thirty years no alternative evidence has ever surfaced. Why is that?

 

[Axxman300]

Below is my latest work-in-progress essay on the "Lone gunman, double bullet" theory:

And the lulz follow...

It may be technically possible to argue against the Single Bullet Theory while still blaming a lone gunman firing a 6.5 Carcano

There were two bullets that hit JFK...so...

An ordinary 6.5 round may have enough energy to move relatively straight through bone structures, but a shooter trying to conceal themselves might try to lower the noise by modifying the powder charge of their rounds, which would also lower it’s velocity.

Okay, what? You can't lower the report of gunfire by concealment. What planet are you from? And the 6.5x52mm Carcano rounds were stock, 250 grain. Already you've demonstrated a lack of basic ballistics, They do make Carcano rounds with lower grain loads, but not these rounds. And they had no been tampered with.

A gunman might also believe that lower velocity rounds would be more deadly for the situation being planned, or they might want to plant evidence with a bullet that doesn’t fragment into pieces too small to trace it’s rifling marks back to the gun.

No. Unless the gunman is a complete idiot, no. The problem with planting evidence is you are leaving stuff behind, and you can't control what the investigators can trace. The smart move is to take your shot, ditch your weapon, and haul ass (which Oswald did).

One form of modification is to use a sabot, made of metal or disposable plastic, in a shell casing to fire a round of ammunition smaller than the rifle it is being fired from, such as a 7.65 casing being used to fire a 6.5 round. Theorists have pointed out the possibility that a sabot can be used to fire a round that has already been fired, if the round has not been too deformed, and it would keep the rifling marks of it’s first firing.

This theory has been shot down multiple times to the point where you can hear the song, "Yackety Sax" whenever some numbskull brings it up.

Also, please put plastic in a round, and fire it. Let us know how that goes.

A lower velocity round fired at a person could enter and barely have enough velocity to exit, or even enter without exiting while still making a piece of shrapnel or bone exit the body.

If your goal is to kill, why risk NOT killing your target? And a low velocity round won't blow out a skull like we see in Dallas.

Parkland hospital’s Dr. Ronald Jones suggested that if Kennedy’s throat wound was not an exit, it also looked like it could’ve been made by a bone fragment or a bullet exiting at very low velocity

But it wasn't. And Jones wasn't a pathologist, nor did he work on Kennedy. But technically the 6.5x52mm round did exit JFK at a lower velocity due to being slowed down by flesh. Funny how that works.

If we posit that Connally was struck in the back at Zapruder frame 222-224, then one might try to argue that Kennedy was hit around z180-190, as he was waving or lowering his hand. Since Zapruder’s camera ran at an average of 18.3 frames per second, a gunman firing at z180 would only have 2.29508196721 seconds between that time and z222, and if at z190 it would be 1.74863387978 seconds. The FBI reported that it took a minimum of 2.3 seconds to cycle the rifle bolt, aim and fire at target

And we now know there are only two shots captured in the Zapruder film with the first being fired a second before the limo appears. The FBI's timing is wrong. The recalculation using only two shot leaves plenty of time.

The fragment of lead on the curb, associated with witness James Tague, could be explained as shrapnel from the head shot, which was suggested by the FBI’s documents. It is not clear why there was a common notion that the curb mark could’ve been caused by a whole 6.5 round hitting it – a 6.5 round would be expected to take a noticeable portion of cement, as demonstrated in a TV special.

The curb mark has always been a red hearing. It was there BEFORE the assassination. It's still there now.

This sequence may seem to heavily contradict the abundance of three-shot witnesses who recalled the last two shots being closer together, as there were almost five seconds between z222 and the head shot at z313. This strong point of witness evidence was even acknowledged in the Warren Report. But there may be some fair questions to ask on the witnesses’ sequence, assuming a lone gunman firing three shots: Could it be possible that some of those who reported hearing three loud shots really only heard two loud shots, with one less loud followed by two louder and more echoey, the last echoing in a way that sounded like two? Could it be possible that the sound of the impact on Kennedy’s skull created a noise loud enough to be mistaken for a separate gunshot?

Throw in an echo and you solve this non-mystery. If there were more shots, where'd they go?

nother possibility to consider is that a lone gunman could have used a semi-automatic or automatic weapon while attempting to frame the official 6.5 Carcano and it’s shell casings.

Lol. No. Now you have to sneak two rifles into the TSBD without anyone seeing this, or finding either weapon before the motorcade arrives.

A semi-automatic or automatic rifle can rapidly fire a combination of low and high velocity rounds, and it may be possible for a witness to mistake the sound of a high-velocity shot followed by a low-velocity shot for a single shot.

Most non-flintlock weapons have optional grain loads. The number of humans who can detect a difference between a high grain load and a low grain load is very low. And grain load is a non-factor in the audiology of this event.

If somebody at this point still wanted to try arguing that Oswald killed Kennedy, they might raise the possibility that he was attempting to plant problematic evidence against himself to mislead investigators and foil the prosecutor’s case against him.

Oswald wasn't that smart. He also didn't know if he'd get a shot at JFK. It was all luck.

Oswald had allegedly declared the backyard photographs to be fakes and that he could prove exactly how they were faked, and some conspiracy theorists have suggested the possibility that Oswald himself constructed the fake photos for some strange reason.

Yet the photos are authentic. And why fake photos when he could just go in the back yard and have Marina snap three photos instead? (Which he did).

Oswald would have planted the unused 6.5 Carcano and it’s three shell casings, then fired several automatic shots, pocketed the real shell casings from the automatic, then smuggled out the automatic or left it in a hiding place.

Do you even think these things through? Now you have Oswald smuggling in two rifles into the TSBD. Not to mention the fact that no gun shop owners, or sporting goods stores ever reported selling Oswald ammunition, and only ONE Dallas gun shop even carried Carcano 6.5x52mm rounds.

The ballistics all point to Oswald from the 6th floor. The forensics all point to Oswald firing from behind on 6th floor.

We can't link Oswald to anyone.

You need to study killing because you are bad it it. In this case there was a small window (pun intended) to set up and take the shots. At any point prior a fellow TSBD employee could have wandered onto the 6th floor to watch the motorcade. Oswald had to unbag the rifle, set up boxes below the window, and be ready to fire. In the known footage we can see him moving in the window as he races to get into position, he barely made it, and that first shot missed. He had no leisure time. He'd spent the morning filling orders. He was not in an area he controlled on any level. He took his shots, landing two, and ditched the rifle on his way out, which is actually a heads-up move, and the better move. Had he kept his cool he could have reached the bus station, maybe even fled back to Mexico...but he didn't.

There were no other gunmen in Dealey Plaza.

 

[bknight]

Below is my latest work-in-progress essay on the "Lone gunman, double bullet" theory:

What a load of bovine excrement.

It may be technically possible to argue against the Single Bullet Theory while still blaming a lone gunman firing a 6.5 Carcano. An ordinary 6.5 round may have enough energy to move relatively straight through bone structures, but a shooter trying to conceal themselves might try to lower the noise by modifying the powder charge of their rounds, which would also lower it’s velocity. A gunman might also believe that lower velocity rounds would be more deadly for the situation being planned, or they might want to plant evidence with a bullet that doesn’t fragment into pieces too small to trace it’s rifling marks back to the gun. One form of modification is to use a sabot, made of metal or disposable plastic, in a shell casing to fire a round of ammunition smaller than the rifle it is being fired from, such as a 7.65 casing being used to fire a 6.5 round. Theorists have pointed out the possibility that a sabot can be used to fire a round that has already been fired, if the round has not been too deformed, and it would keep the rifling marks of it’s first firing. An unintentional short shot or “misfire” could also travel with reduced velocity. A lower velocity round fired at a person could enter and barely have enough velocity to exit, or even enter without exiting while still making a piece of shrapnel or bone exit the body. Parkland hospital’s Dr. Ronald Jones suggested that if Kennedy’s throat wound was not an exit, it also looked like it could’ve been made by a bone fragment or a bullet exiting at very low velocity. The shell casings in evidence should be examined to check whether there are any signs of them being fired with a reduced power charge. If we posit that Connally was struck in the back at Zapruder frame 222-224, then one might try to argue that Kennedy was hit around z180-190, as he was waving or lowering his hand. Since Zapruder’s camera ran at an average of 18.3 frames per second, a gunman firing at z180 would only have 2.29508196721 seconds between that time and z222, and if at z190 it would be 1.74863387978 seconds. The FBI reported that it took a minimum of 2.3 seconds to cycle the rifle bolt, aim and fire at target. The fragment of lead on the curb, associated with witness James Tague, could be explained as shrapnel from the head shot, which was suggested by the FBI’s documents. It is not clear why there was a common notion that the curb mark could’ve been caused by a whole 6.5 round hitting it – a 6.5 round would be expected to take a noticeable portion of cement, as demonstrated in a TV special. This sequence may seem to heavily contradict the abundance of three-shot witnesses who recalled the last two shots being closer together, as there were almost five seconds between z222 and the head shot at z313. This strong point of witness evidence was even acknowledged in the Warren Report. But there may be some fair questions to ask on the witnesses’ sequence, assuming a lone gunman firing three shots: Could it be possible that some of those who reported hearing three loud shots really only heard two loud shots, with one less loud followed by two louder and more echoey, the last echoing in a way that sounded like two? Could it be possible that the sound of the impact on Kennedy’s skull created a noise loud enough to be mistaken for a separate gunshot?

Another possibility to consider is that a lone gunman could have used a semi-automatic or automatic weapon while attempting to frame the official 6.5 Carcano and it’s shell casings. A semi-automatic or automatic rifle can rapidly fire a combination of low and high velocity rounds, and it may be possible for a witness to mistake the sound of a high-velocity shot followed by a low-velocity shot for a single shot. If somebody at this point still wanted to try arguing that Oswald killed Kennedy, they might raise the possibility that he was attempting to plant problematic evidence against himself to mislead investigators and foil the prosecutor’s case against him. Oswald had allegedly declared the backyard photographs to be fakes and that he could prove exactly how they were faked, and some conspiracy theorists have suggested the possibility that Oswald himself constructed the fake photos for some strange reason. In this shooting scenario, Oswald would have planted the unused 6.5 Carcano and it’s three shell casings, then fired several automatic shots, pocketed the real shell casings from the automatic, then smuggled out the automatic or left it in a hiding place.

"It may be technically possible to argue against the Single Bullet Theory". Only if you disregard evidence in the investigation. Then you need to make up a story to fit your delirious beliefs. 60 years of digging and the CTs can't put a bough on any CT. You still don't get it, perhaps you never will.

 

[smartcooky]

Also, please put plastic in a round, and fire it.

You appear to setting poor @MicahJava
uP for a Darwin Award!!

Let us know how that goes.

He won't be able to.

 

[Axxman300]

You appear to setting poor @MicahJava
uP for a Darwin Award!!


He won't be able to.

 

[MicahJava]

They do make Carcano rounds with lower grain loads, but not these rounds. And they had no been tampered with.

Classic

Where did you get the certainty that the shell casings had not been tampered with? What evidence excludes this?

Also, where on Earth did you get the idea that the James Tague curb mark was "there before the assassination"?

 

[Axxman300]

Classic

Where did you get the certainty that the shell casings had not been tampered with? What evidence excludes this?

Also, where on Earth did you get the idea that the James Tague curb mark was "there before the assassination"?

Why tamper with, what was an exotic caliber in 1963 Texas, when you could have simply bought a lower grain round instead? Carcano made three, Oswald bought the max load. Then you have the performance of the bullets fired. Both shots are indicative of a 250 grain, 6.5x52mm round.

And the "damaged curb" mark is still there today. They looked at it in 1963 and 64. If it was evidence they would have removed it for evidence. It's just a flaw in the concrete.

This is why you and the other nutjobs fail, you don't understand organized killing on any level. In those days the CIA, Mafia, KGB, and others who employed killers would never take the risks involved that you and the other CTist loonies propose. The Mafia in the US never used long rifles, they always killed up close (that's why ex mob guys thought Ruby was working for them - he wasn't, but...). The CIA and KGB preferred poisons, but if it came down to an open hit with a rifle they'd used one gunman, and sometimes he had a getaway driver. I need to point out JFK remains the only modern assassination by rifle. The attempt on Trump is exhibit-A as to why it's a bad idea if you want to succeed. And like Trump's would-be assassin, Oswald didn't really know what he was doing either.

For your stupid theory to work, history since 1950 should be littered with political assassinations by snipers, and yet JFK is the only successful hit. Why is that? Sure, after November, 1963 the Secret Service got it together, but what about other countries? Where are the snipers in Africa, South America, or Europe? I guess I need to point out the obvious yet again, NOBODY USES SNIPERS FOR POLITCAL ASSASSINATIONS. You have to go back to 1584 to find one prior to 1963. Why do you think that is? Could it be that the further the distance between the shooter and target, the greater the risk of missing? Look at Edwin Walker. Oswald missed because Walker dropped his pen. Had he just knocked on Walker's door, and shot him with his .38 he would have vanished into the night, with a high chance of getting away with the murder due to the .38 being a common round.

A real assassin/hitman would know this. A real assassin would not take part in a convoluted plan. A real assassin often works alone, or with a small support team, depending on the target. Real assassins don't plant evidence. They make their hit, and leave. The less time on target the greater the odds of not being caught.

You suggest Oswald picked up his brass, and then planted three others. The smarter move (if you knew anything about ballistics, and forensics of 1963/64) would have been to police his casings, and EMPTY HIS RIFLE OF REMAINING ROUNDS to take with him. This way his lawyer could claim the rifle was not fired on that day, and create reasonable doubt in a jury (not that anyone in Dallas would have bought it). Instead, Oswald took his shots, ditched the rifle, and left the building which was pretty heads up as it went.

Look at assassins today. The FSB, Mossad, and even the CIA (who seem to be back in the game) don't use snipers. The FSB still uses poison, although they're making good use of gravity and rapid deceleration these days, but at some point their assassins are in close contact with their target. Mossad keeps rewriting the book on assassinations, and while the Hamas pager operation is a friggin' masterpiece of ACTUAL HUGE CONSPIRACY, their assassins still usually are on the back of a motorbike with an Uzi (not even suppressed). And the CIA, well...depends of the target, but it's usually close range (unless they use a Ginsu-Hellfire, gotta love a missile with a spinning blade warhead). I'm sure they all have snipers, but it's possible they're more for security of the primary team.

The great great author, Carrie Fischer wrote in her book, Surrender the Pink, "There is no such thing as a ball-breaker, just balls that can be broken". I've modified this to say, "There's no such thing as a chain-yanker, just chains allowed to be yanked." You have let people yank your chain, you've bought into lie to base your world view upon. You ignore history, you ignore fact to believe in ghost stories of shadowy hitmen converging on Dealey Plaza to fire on JFK from multiple locations, some with suppressed weapons, who then slipped away. And then their handlers go to work to frame Oswald. Not a Cuban, not a Russian, not some guy from North Vietnam. No, a loser who'd failed at defecting before getting a dead-end job at a book warehouse. A health mind cannot stretch enough to buy into this ghost story. And it is a ghost story.

 

[smartcooky]

Why tamper with, what was an exotic caliber in 1963 Texas, when you could have simply bought a lower grain round instead? Carcano made three, Oswald bought the max load. Then you have the performance of the bullets fired. Both shots are indicative of a 250 grain, 6.5x52mm round.

And the "damaged curb" mark is still there today. They looked at it in 1963 and 64. If it was evidence they would have removed it for evidence. It's just a flaw in the concrete.

This is why you and the other nutjobs fail, you don't understand organized killing on any level. In those days the CIA, Mafia, KGB, and others who employed killers would never take the risks involved that you and the other CTist loonies propose. The Mafia in the US never used long rifles, they always killed up close (that's why ex mob guys thought Ruby was working for them - he wasn't, but...). The CIA and KGB preferred poisons, but if it came down to an open hit with a rifle they'd used one gunman, and sometimes he had a getaway driver. I need to point out JFK remains the only modern assassination by rifle. The attempt on Trump is exhibit-A as to why it's a bad idea if you want to succeed. And like Trump's would-be assassin, Oswald didn't really know what he was doing either.

For your stupid theory to work, history since 1950 should be littered with political assassinations by snipers, and yet JFK is the only successful hit. Why is that? Sure, after November, 1963 the Secret Service got it together, but what about other countries? Where are the snipers in Africa, South America, or Europe? I guess I need to point out the obvious yet again, NOBODY USES SNIPERS FOR POLITCAL ASSASSINATIONS. You have to go back to 1584 to find one prior to 1963. Why do you think that is? Could it be that the further the distance between the shooter and target, the greater the risk of missing? Look at Edwin Walker. Oswald missed because Walker dropped his pen. Had he just knocked on Walker's door, and shot him with his .38 he would have vanished into the night, with a high chance of getting away with the murder due to the .38 being a common round.

A real assassin/hitman would know this. A real assassin would not take part in a convoluted plan. A real assassin often works alone, or with a small support team, depending on the target. Real assassins don't plant evidence. They make their hit, and leave. The less time on target the greater the odds of not being caught.

You suggest Oswald picked up his brass, and then planted three others. The smarter move (if you knew anything about ballistics, and forensics of 1963/64) would have been to police his casings, and EMPTY HIS RIFLE OF REMAINING ROUNDS to take with him. This way his lawyer could claim the rifle was not fired on that day, and create reasonable doubt in a jury (not that anyone in Dallas would have bought it). Instead, Oswald took his shots, ditched the rifle, and left the building which was pretty heads up as it went.

Look at assassins today. The FSB, Mossad, and even the CIA (who seem to be back in the game) don't use snipers. The FSB still uses poison, although they're making good use of gravity and rapid deceleration these days, but at some point their assassins are in close contact with their target. Mossad keeps rewriting the book on assassinations, and while the Hamas pager operation is a friggin' masterpiece of ACTUAL HUGE CONSPIRACY, their assassins still usually are on the back of a motorbike with an Uzi (not even suppressed). And the CIA, well...depends of the target, but it's usually close range (unless they use a Ginsu-Hellfire, gotta love a missile with a spinning blade warhead). I'm sure they all have snipers, but it's possible they're more for security of the primary team.

The great great author, Carrie Fischer wrote in her book, Surrender the Pink, "There is no such thing as a ball-breaker, just balls that can be broken". I've modified this to say, "There's no such thing as a chain-yanker, just chains allowed to be yanked." You have let people yank your chain, you've bought into lie to base your world view upon. You ignore history, you ignore fact to believe in ghost stories of shadowy hitmen converging on Dealey Plaza to fire on JFK from multiple locations, some with suppressed weapons, who then slipped away. And then their handlers go to work to frame Oswald. Not a Cuban, not a Russian, not some guy from North Vietnam. No, a loser who'd failed at defecting before getting a dead-end job at a book warehouse. A health mind cannot stretch enough to buy into this ghost story. And it is a ghost story.

Yup.

There is a reason why snipers are part of Force Recon in the US Marines. They are mainly used in support and intelligence gathering roles, combining this with the ability to take out high value targets of opportunity. They mostly operate as a team of two...the sniper and his spotter.

 

[angrysoba]

I need to point out JFK remains the only modern assassination by rifle. The attempt on Trump is exhibit-A as to why it's a bad idea if you want to succeed. And like Trump's would-be assassin, Oswald didn't really know what he was doing either.

For your stupid theory to work, history since 1950 should be littered with political assassinations by snipers, and yet JFK is the only successful hit. Why is that? Sure, after November, 1963 the Secret Service got it together, but what about other countries? Where are the snipers in Africa, South America, or Europe? I guess I need to point out the obvious yet again, NOBODY USES SNIPERS FOR POLITCAL ASSASSINATIONS. You have to go back to 1584 to find one prior to 1963. Why do you think that is? Could it be that the further the distance between the shooter and target, the greater the risk of missing? Look at Edwin Walker. Oswald missed because Walker dropped his pen. Had he just knocked on Walker's door, and shot him with his .38 he would have vanished into the night, with a high chance of getting away with the murder due to the .38 being a common round.

A real assassin/hitman would know this. A real assassin would not take part in a convoluted plan. A real assassin often works alone, or with a small support team, depending on the target. Real assassins don't plant evidence. They make their hit, and leave. The less time on target the greater the odds of not being caught.

Not disagreeing with the substance, but there have been a couple of other rifle assassinations: MLK Jr, of course, and more recently Charlie Kirk.

One thing I found mildly racist was that part of the argument from incredulity around LHO shooting JFK is that he used an old, Italian army rifle, whereas it has seemed to me that nobody doubted that Kirk was shot with an old, German army rifle! LOL!

Of course, that thought came to me too soon as there have of course bloomed a number of conspiracy theories around Kirk's killing as well.

 

[MicahJava]

And the "damaged curb" mark is still there today. They looked at it in 1963 and 64. If it was evidence they would have removed it for evidence. It's just a flaw in the concrete.

You are still confused. The "James Tague" curb stone was removed, a few inch slice of it anyway, and placed into the National Archives. That mark is officially acknowleged to be from the shooting.

You must be referring to that hole on the corner of the sewer covering across the street from the grassy knoll.

Posters like Axxman and Hank have been here for years, they were here to personally watch me grow from a young, new JFK hobbyist in 2015 to... somebody who is at least capable of remembering basic details of the case.

 

[MicahJava]

If anybody is interested in some actually intelligent discussion on the Kennedy case, I recommend these guys.

 

[Axxman300]

Not disagreeing with the substance, but there have been a couple of other rifle assassinations: MLK Jr, of course, and more recently Charlie Kirk.

True. I was referring to political leaders. And King and Kirk were killed with a 30-06 round, which is a common bullet used by most hunters. Like Oswald, James Earl Ray, and the guy who shot Kirk are cowards, and like Oswald, their weapons traced right back to them. None of them were professionals, though Oswald had been a Marine, and Ray had served in the US Army. Both were dishonorably discharged. Tyler Robinson is not a vet, but seems to have been on the same downward trajectory. None of those guys would be allowed near a professional clandestine operation for obvious reasons.

 

[Axxman300]

You are still confused. The "James Tague" curb stone was removed, a few inch slice of it anyway, and placed into the National Archives. That mark is officially acknowleged to be from the shooting.

You must be referring to that hole on the corner of the sewer covering across the street from the grassy knoll.

And unlike you I post links:

Photograph of a man removing a section of curb from Main Street in Dealey Plaza | The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza

Black and white photograph of a man using a Clipper Concrete Saw to remove a section of curb in Dealey Plaza for the FBI on August 5, 1964. He is …

www.jfk.org

Guess what? It's not a bullet strike. The first shot went into the tree in front of the TSBD, probably still there. All that matters are the two that hit JFK.

Posters like Axxman and Hank have been here for years, they were here to personally watch me grow from a young, new JFK hobbyist in 2015 to... somebody who is at least capable of remembering basic details of the case.

No growth whatsoever. No ability to learn, grasp facts. That spew about lower powered bullets is comedy gold, though.

 

[Axxman300]

If anybody is interested in some actually intelligent discussion on the Kennedy case, I recommend these guys.

Yes, because a bunch of junkies is always the best source for reliable information. Example: RFK Jr.

Why not bigfoot? He's great vanishing. Why isn't bigfoot suspect number one?

 

[MicahJava]

And unlike you I post links:

Photograph of a man removing a section of curb from Main Street in Dealey Plaza | The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza

Black and white photograph of a man using a Clipper Concrete Saw to remove a section of curb in Dealey Plaza for the FBI on August 5, 1964. He is …

www.jfk.org

Guess what? It's not a bullet strike. The first shot went into the tree in front of the TSBD, probably still there. All that matters are the two that hit JFK.

No growth whatsoever. No ability to learn, grasp facts. That spew about lower powered bullets is comedy gold, though.

The curbstone is officially the spot where a fragment of lead from a bullet landed and nicked a tiny fragment of cement up and wounded James Tague's face. I am not of the misconception that a whole 6.5 round could've struck the curb, because that would have blown out a bigger chunk of cement. I don't know why the Warren Commission allowed the public to hold the misconception that the curb mark was caused by a whole bullet strike. A fragment from the headshot is within the realm of physical possibility.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-3.html

At a different location in Dealey Plaza, the evidence indicated that a bullet fragment did hit the street. James T. Tague, who got out of his car to watch the motorcade from a position between Commerce and Main Streets near the Triple Underpass, was hit on the cheek by an object during the shooting.356 Within a few minutes Tague reported this to Deputy Sheriff Eddy R. Walthers, who was examining the area to see if any bullets had struck the turf.357 Walthers immediately started to search where Tague had been standing and located a place on the south curb of Main Street where it appeared a bullet had hit the cement.358 According to Tague, "There was a mark quite obviously that was a bullet, and it was very fresh."359 In Tague's opinion, it was the second shot which caused the mark, since he thinks he heard the third shot after he was hit in the face.360 This incident appears to have been recorded in the contemporaneous report of Dallas Patrolman L. L. Hill, who radioed in around 12:40 p.m.: "I have one guy that was possibly hit by a richochet from the bullet off the concrete."361 Scientific examination of the mark on the south curb of Main Street by FBI experts disclosed metal smears which, "were spectrographically determined to be essentially lead with a trace of antimony."362 The mark on the curb could have originated from the lead core of a bullet but the absence of copper precluded "the possibility that the mark on the curbing section was made by an unmutilated military full metal-jacketed bullet such as the bullet from Governor Connally's stretcher."363

Footnotes for chapter 3: https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-18.html#chapter3

356. 7 H 553 (James T. Tague).
357. 7 H 546 (Eddy R. Walthers).
358. Ibid.; 7 H 553 (Tague).
359. Ibid.
360. Id. at 555.
361. CE 1974, p. 166; see 6 H 298 (Haygood).
362. 15 H 700 (Shaneyfelt).
363. Ibid.

Letter from J. Edgar Hoover to J. Lee Rankin: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11778#relPageId=3&