And which of the several assassinations and attempted assassinations of US Presidents was "professional"????????
I'd say the most professional were the ones that succeeded. Many did not succeed.
Those which are professional would be those done by professionals. People whose life vocation was assassination, trained for that purpose. Being part of a conspiracy was not enough to become a professional assassin. Being a trained assassin in the habit of taking lives is different from just deciding to pick up a gun one day.
Assassins who use multiple fire teams to set up a kill zone, be they terrorist, soldiers, or criminal, do not use a patsy. Those who intend to walk away afterwards with their identity a mystery do not use the methods Robert describes.
Professionals don't tend to use rifles in the way Robert describes unless all other options are exhausted. It is far more common for organised groups to use explosive devices. It is easier to 1) avoid detection, 2) escape after, 3)maximise the chances of a fatality, and 4) "frame a patsy" with false evidence, if this is indeed part of your plan.
It amazes me that conspiracy theorists assume that state sponsored assassinations with the resources they attribute to the likes of the JFK, and RFK murders -or more precisely the cover-ups afterwards would not have just avoided the obvious and expensive head aches by avoiding the need to obtain and alter all films and autopsy reports, stage the WC, plant false witnesses, etc, when by necessity of being "in the game" they would be aware of much more effective methods that have been used before.
Would the CIA have absent mindedly overlooked the use of ricin from an umbrella to kill Markov? Or the 1950s use of an arsnic spray to make the deaths of Lev Rebet and Stepan Bandera appear to be heart attacks? If only one had died that way would suspicions have been raised above kooky conspiacy theories?
Why would the CIA suddenly forget their jobs and plan a military operation for what should have been a spy game? Why would they, in short, act like ametures instead of assassins during an assassination?
Or, on the other hand we have LHO, a former marine, not an assassin, taking out a guy like with the method of a former marine. We have LHO alone, playing at being a spy with all the skill of a fantasist.
There is too much physical evidence missing from Roberts theory, too many reasons that anybody with the power to fulfil his fantasy would have worked any other way. There is not enough reason to believe any of it happened as he described. He has yet to show evidence of a single frame of film, or a single photograph to have been altered. All he can say is "people didn't remember it that way." Not the same thing, by any way or means.
