JFK's assassination: your thoughts

[JayUtah]

This isnt true.

I'm reading contemporary news articles which say essentially what I claim, but that's the opinion of their authors. You're arguing from opinion polls, which isn't exactly the same thing but it is nevertheless informative.

However it's still misleading for reasons which have been discussed ad nauseam in this thread -- because everyone who advocates a conspiracy theory brings up these same poll results as if it supported their theory.

This is especially troublesome for the Lone Nut side, since consistently since the 60s the whole of the mainstream media has aggressively promoted the Lone Nut side...

Examples? What about the cable channels that run Kennedy assassination theories nonstop? Are they not also mainstream?

The HSCA is the last investigation into the murder conducted by the US government. I'd be the first to admit it made many baffling mistakes, but its at least as legitimate as the WC and chronologically superseded it.

So what point are you trying to argue? You seem to single out HSCA because it reached the finding you wanted, but you admit it has commensurate credibility for the same reasons pro and con as the committee you say got it wrong and wasn't believed. I have a different opinion regarding the reliability of these various committees but it's not important right now; I'm just trying to understand how your line of reasoning supports any kind of a conclusion.

Therefore at the very least, there are 2 official verdicts of the US government, and one of them is probable conspiracy.

Asked and answered. "Probable conspiracy" was not an affirmative finding but rather a default, and as discussed it was based on evidence that was explained later.

 

[Soily]

An eye witness account from almost 50 years after the fact.

Except his story has remained unchanged for 50 years

If we're going to speculate, how about LHO brought the rifle in disassembled, and lubed it during re-assembly?

Could you explain what you mean by this?

The timeline goes against Oswald spending a lot of time tending to the gun. Not only was the entire 6th floor occupied by a floor laying crew all morning, Bonnie Ray Williams was there on his own until at least 12:15. The parade was actually late that day, as far as Oswald could have known it was due to pass between 12:20-25.

This leaves him, realistically, around 5 minutes to retrieve the huge package, wherever he'd hidden it, assemble the rifle, 'lube' the rifle, construct the snipers nest and prepare his sniper position. He then shoots Kennedy and Connally, wipes the rifle clean of prints, hides it on the other side of the room, rearranges the boxes in the snipers nest (as revealed by the HSCA) runs down the stairs and bumps into a policeman on the 1st, 2nd or 4th floor depending which version of the story you believe. He's as cool as you like, not out of breath or excited.

Impressive work. We should stop denigrating Oswald as a loser and congratulate him for his amazing coolness and poise. He's one of the most audacious and successful assassins ever.

Of course, his preternatural coolness was noted by more than one of the people around his interrogation:

Jesse Curry said - "One would think Oswald had been trained in interrogation techniques and resisting interrogation techniques."

District Attorney William Alexander said - "I was amazed that a person so young would have had the self-control he had. It was almost as if he had been rehearsed or programmed to meet the situation he found himself in."

Detective Boyd said - "I never saw another man just exactly like him...just as soon as you would ask him a question, he would just give you the answer right back -- he didn't hesitate about his answers. I mean as soon as you would pop him a question, he would shoot you an answer right back and like I said, I never saw a man that could answer questions like he did."

Will Fritz - "Every time I asked him a question that meant something, that would produce evidence, he immediately told me he wouldn't tell me about it and he seemed to anticipate what I was going to ask."

Harry Holmes - "Oswald at no time appeared confused or in doubt as to whether or not he should answer a question. On the contrary, he was quite alert and showed no hesitancy in answering those question which he wanted to answer and was quite skilful in parrying those questions which he did not want to answer."

Were did this 24 year old looser develop such acumen that he was able to so expertly spar with Dallas's finest detectives and lawyers? Was it the same place he learned to speak fluent Russian to the point where native speakers thought he had a 'remarkable fluency in Russian'?

 

[Soily]

This is getting ridiculous. Even if Oswald never washed ever this whole thing fails to impress. What happens if you sweat a bunch? It wasn't a hot day but Oswald took several actions that certainly would get the heart rate up.

As for the hands: that is what makes you tests so wonky. Hands show more contaminants than the cheeks,. The opposite cheek even has a higher rate than the 'expected' cheek.

You are arguing what design the deck chairs were on the Titanic, while ignoring the fact that it sank.

No, I'm arguing about the specific issues been discussed in the thread. If you want to talk about something else then go ahead.

Back on topic, as Pat Speer has pointed out, the forensic literature shows that GSR can still be picked up to 24 hours after the firing of a weapon. For the majority of the time after he was accused of shooting Kennedy, he was sat in an air conditioned police department. We know he didn't wash his face, so there's no real reason to believe the results were compromised.

 

[Mudcat]

Oswald did some pretty amazing things that day, now you're saying he washed his face without using his hands?

Why is it such a big deal that Lee Harvey Oswald did not have gunshot residue on his face (assuming the notoriously unreliable paraffin test was not a false negative)? I know exactly nothing about firearms but I was one of several people in thread that have established that in the normal operations of any kind of riffle you would normally would not find traces of gunshot residue on a shooter's face. It would take a catastrophic failure for there to be any on his face.

The fact that the riffle functioned during the forensic testing and that Oswald wasn't in the hospital after shooting the president, we can safely assume that a catastrophic failure did not happen.

 

[Soily]

I'm reading contemporary news articles which say essentially what I claim, but that's the opinion of their authors. You're arguing from opinion polls, which isn't exactly the same thing but it is nevertheless informative.

However it's still misleading for reasons which have been discussed ad nauseam in this thread -- because everyone who advocates a conspiracy theory brings up these same poll results as if it supported their theory.

You're the one who brought up opinion. I'm not that interested in what opinion polls say. Opinion polls consistently say the public belief all sorts of nonsense, its largely meaningless in itself.

The facts say Oswald didn't act alone, opinion is mainly of interest when were arguing about opinions.

Examples? What about the cable channels that run Kennedy assassination theories nonstop? Are they not also mainstream?

*Every* Kennedy documentary on the history channel and Nat Geo are pro lone nut, pro WC. If you could even name one single anti WC documentary on a major network id be surprised, the list is so vanishingly small.

So what point are you trying to argue? You seem to single out HSCA because it reached the finding you wanted, but you admit it has commensurate credibility for the same reasons pro and con as the committee you say got it wrong and wasn't believed. I have a different opinion regarding the reliability of these various committees but it's not important right now; I'm just trying to understand how your line of reasoning supports any kind of a conclusion.

Back to opinion. I was pointing out the official opinion US government. In *my* opinion, the HSCA contains as much if not more nonsense than the WC. Its slightly redeemed because some parts of it at least made an attempt to find the truth, such as their work on Mexico City and 'Maurice Bishop'. They successfully, albeit inadvertently, undermined the already preposterous single bullet theory too, which is useful.

 

[kookbreaker]

No, I'm arguing about the specific issues been discussed in the thread. If you want to talk about something else then go ahead.

Back on topic, as Pat Speer has pointed out, the forensic literature shows that GSR can still be picked up to 24 hours after the firing of a weapon. For the majority of the time after he was accused of shooting Kennedy, he was sat in an air conditioned police department. We know he didn't wash his face, so there's no real reason to believe the results were compromised.

But the science is no good. You've got a sample size of two +Oswald. They are using different rifles (same model, but different), we have no controls for a baseline, and the numbers jump all over the place. This is why I am unimpressed, I just gave some further reasons why Oswald's 'numbers' might be lower before you even get into the severe experimental flaws.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Oswald did some pretty amazing things that day, now you're saying he washed his face without using his hands? The *palms* of his hands had more nitrates on than the backs. If he'd washed his face, he'd have washed the nitrates off his palms too.

Besides, his landlady said he rushed into his room, then rushed straight out. She never said he used the bathroom.

How did the rifle get into the TSBD? What happened to the long bag that Oswald brought with him the day of the assassination? What happened to the curtain rods he said were in it? Why did he try to make an escape and murder a police officer? Why did he try to murder more officers in the theater when they cornered him? Why did Oswald practice on General Walker? Who stole Oswald's rifle and planted it on the sixth floor of the TSBD?

You have some 'splaining to do!

 

[Soily]

Why is it such a big deal that Lee Harvey Oswald did not have gunshot residue on his face (assuming the notoriously unreliable paraffin test was not a false negative)?

As explained several times, the paraffin tests are irrelevant. It's the NAA tests that are important. NAA tests are not unreliable.

 

[RoboTimbo]

They successfully, albeit inadvertently, undermined the already preposterous single bullet theory too, which is useful.

LOL! Where did the bullets come from that did the damage? How many were there?

 

[BStrong]

Soily:

"Could you explain what you mean by this?"

The assertion is that since the Carcano was well oiled, and the paper bag showed no residue of lube, the bag could not have contained the rifle.

The rifle could have been lubed by LHO during reassembly.

And the accounts of LHO as being a one-off in his interrorgation says more about the officers experience rather than LHO's skills - I've encountered individuals that had very quick explanations for every question asked, and showed -0- concern even while being arrested.

Sociopaths are usually pretty good at ********ting their way through any interview, LE or otherwise.

ETA - you're assuming that the reassembly of the rifle took place directly before the shooting - it's not determined when the rifle was reassembled by LHO.

 

[kookbreaker]

This leaves him, realistically, around 5 minutes

Let's assume your timeline is accurate for the sake of argument.

to retrieve the huge package,

Of the adjectives I would use to describe the package 'huge' would not be one of them. I have Priority Mail shipping boxes that are larger than that ba.

wherever he'd hidden it, assemble the rifle,

Not hard with practice and depending on how much he had broken in down, if at all. He probably had plenty of chances to assemble it in the morning given how the boxes had been moved for the reflooring.

'lube' the rifle,

Not required.

construct the snipers nest and prepare his sniper position.

Which could easily have been done at other times.

He then shoots Kennedy and Connally,

Yes.

wipes the rifle clean of prints,

Not even remotely required. Fingerprints simply do not show up all the time.

hides it on the other side of the room,

He tosses it between boxes. Not hard not time consuming.

rearranges the boxes in the snipers nest (as revealed by the HSCA)

You want to support that statement?

runs down the stairs and bumps into a policeman on the 1st, 2nd or 4th floor depending which version of the story you believe. He's as cool as you like, not out of breath or excited.

Probably because he did not need to run. Going down stairs, even at a decent pace is not hard.

 

[BStrong]

How did the rifle get into the TSBD? What happened to the long bag that Oswald brought with him the day of the assassination? What happened to the curtain rods he said were in it? Why did he try to make an escape and murder a police officer? Why did he try to murder more officers in the theater when they cornered him? Why did Oswald practice on General Walker? Who stole Oswald's rifle and planted it on the sixth floor of the TSBD?

You have some 'splaining to do!

An honest researcher would, but if someone plays connects the dots with the anomalies, no cogent explanation is required.

 

[kookbreaker]

Soily:

"Could you explain what you mean by this?"

The assertion is that since the Carcano was well oiled, and the paper bag showed no residue of lube, the bag could not have contained the rifle.

The rifle could have been lubed by LHO during reassembly.

Or, maybe when saying 'well-oiled' they are just talking about some internal parts.

 

[Soily]

How did the rifle get into the TSBD?

I don't have a time machine or psychic powers. However, I don't feel someone putting a rifle in a building is a particularly jaw dropping feat.

What happened to the long bag that Oswald brought with him the day of the assassination?

The witness testimony shows Oswald was carrying a grocery bag that was far smaller than the one alleged to contain a rifle.

What happened to the curtain rods he said were in it?

A lie to avoid talking about his marital problems.

Why did he try to make an escape and murder a police officer?

He didn't. Helen Markham and TF Bowley's testimony show the murder of Tippit occurred before 1:10pm, therefore Oswald physically couldn't have been there in time to commit it.

Why did he try to murder more officers in the theater when they cornered him? Why did Oswald practice on General Walker?

He didn't. As explained earlier, there as no evidence Oswald attempted to shoot anyone at the Texas Theatre and no evidence that he attempted to fire on Walker, at least not alone with the Carcano.

Who stole Oswald's rifle and planted it on the sixth floor of the TSBD?

Absent the aforementioned time machine or psychic powers, this is impossible to ascertain today.

However, the evidence that he did bring the rifle into work that today is extremely weak.

 

[BStrong]

I don't have a time machine or psychic powers. However, I don't feel someone putting a rifle in a building is a particularly jaw dropping feat.

The witness testimony shows Oswald was carrying a grocery bag that was far smaller than the one alleged to contain a rifle.


A lie to avoid talking about his marital problems.


He didn't. Helen Markham and TF Bowley's testimony show the murder of Tippit occurred before 1:10pm, therefore Oswald physically couldn't have been there in time to commit it.


He didn't. As explained earlier, there as no evidence Oswald attempted to shoot anyone at the Texas Theatre and no evidence that he attempted to fire on Walker, at least not alone with the Carcano.


Absent the aforementioned time machine or psychic powers, this is impossible to ascertain today.

However, the evidence that he did bring the rifle into work that today is extremely weak.

If you're going to assert that LHO would have to be noticed when he brought in the Carcano, you need to explain how another individual would not be noticed.

ETA - unless you can prove local witnesses had watches or clocks in sync to the correct time and each other, the timeline evidence is fairly worthless.

 

[JayUtah]

You're the one who brought up opinion.

No, you did. You said there has been little if any public confidence in the Warren Commission report, including some of the commissioners themselves and the man who commissioned it. That was at odds with some of the contemporary reports I'd read which offered the opinion that the interest in conspiracy theories dropped when the report was published. That account seemed to support the idea that the WC report had some value in dispelling conspiracy theories, which to me means it was, at least at that time, more credible than some conspiracy theories among the general public.

I'm not that interested in what opinion polls say. Opinion polls consistently say the public belief all sorts of nonsense, its largely meaningless in itself.

I agree. I am less concerned with what people believe than with why they believe it. Of the people who believe Oswald did not act alone, I would ask how many of them could give a reasoned answer. Are they just opting for the "safe" alternative in a consequence-free context?

The facts say Oswald didn't act alone...

Well that's a matter of long-running dispute. I tend to consider the inability after 50 years to build a credible case for a co-conspirator, and at the same time to name so many candidates according to different lines of reasoning, to fare rather ill for those who say there were others directly involved.

If you could even name one single anti WC documentary on a major network id be surprised, the list is so vanishingly small.

The Men Who Killed Kennedy. It aired yearly on the History Channel for several years.

I noticed you didn't provide any examples. Surely you can provide numerous examples of the massive mainstream bias in favor of the Warren Commission.

Back to opinion. I was pointing out the official opinion US government.

The HSCA found that Oswald killed Kennedy. They were unable to identify any co-conspirator. They inferred instead that one "probably" existed only because they were unable to account for certain evidence under certain assumptions. However, later those assumptions were found to be in error. Therefore continuing to harp on the one inferential and now discredited finding from the HSCA while ignoring the major, undisputed finding is rather disingenuous.

In *my* opinion, the HSCA contains as much if not more nonsense than the WC. Its slightly redeemed because some parts of it at least made an attempt to find the truth, such as their work on Mexico City and 'Maurice Bishop'.

You're still trying to have your cake and eat it too. The HSCA was, you admit, a fiasco but still managed to reach conclusions you agree with. It seems you're trying to tell us they accidentally got the "right" answer, but that should still carry some kind of authority. The Warren Commission, according to you, made fewer errors but still managed to reach the "wrong" conclusion, and so should be dismissed.

Can you explain how this is anything other than circular reasoning?

They successfully, albeit inadvertently, undermined the already preposterous single bullet theory too, which is useful.

No, only the straw man proposed by conspiracy theorists is preposterous. As to the finding in question, it was a default assumption as I already discussed, not an affirmative finding. Will you please address that aspect of it?

 

[JayUtah]

I don't have a time machine or psychic powers.

Absent the aforementioned time machine or psychic powers, this is impossible to ascertain today.

A simple, "I have no answer or explanation" is sufficient. You don't need to shame your critics away from asking you to account for evidence in your theory. These are not unreasonable questions.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I don't have a time machine or psychic powers. However, I don't feel someone putting a rifle in a building is a particularly jaw dropping feat.

You have no evidence of anyone else bringing a gigantic rifle into the TSBD.

The witness testimony shows Oswald was carrying a grocery bag that was far smaller than the one alleged to contain a rifle.

No evidence that anyone else was ever seen carrying an enormous rifle into the TSBD then.

A lie to avoid talking about his marital problems.

Then what was in the long package he brought? A couple of footlong hotdogs for his lunch?

He didn't. Helen Markham and TF Bowley's testimony show the murder of Tippit occurred before 1:10pm, therefore Oswald physically couldn't have been there in time to commit it.

Actually, yes, he did. The question was, why did he?

He didn't. As explained earlier, there as no evidence Oswald attempted to shoot anyone at the Texas Theatre and no evidence that he attempted to fire on Walker, at least not alone with the Carcano.

Actually, yes, he did. The question was, why did he? Marina even scolded him for it.

Absent the aforementioned time machine or psychic powers, this is impossible to ascertain today.

No evidence for anyone else to have taken Oswald's rifle, brought it to the TSBD, or fired it. Gotcha.

However, the evidence that he did bring the rifle into work that today is extremely weak.

No, it's very strong. Nobody has ever been able to gainsay it.

Do you have any kind of theory at all that fits all the evidence? Anything?

 

[Soily]

Of the adjectives I would use to describe the package 'huge' would not be one of them. I have Priority Mail shipping boxes that are larger than that ba.

A bag more than half your own height is huge by any normal estimation.

Not hard with practice and depending on how much he had broken in down, if at all. He probably had plenty of chances to assemble it in the morning given how the boxes had been moved for the reflooring.

The official story affords him no such practice. Not only is the rifle hidden in the Paine's garage for months before the shooting, the entire 6th floor is occupied by a floor laying crew the whole morning until just before lunch. And then until around 12:15 Bonnie Ray Williams is alone on the 6th floor having his lunch. With the motorcade expected around 12:20-25, that affords Oswald only 5 minutes to prepare everything.

Which could easily have been done at other times.

So now he's roaming a busy office building with dozens of employees with a rifle and nobody notices? Amazing.

You want to support that statement?

...

Probably because he did not need to run. Going down stairs, even at a decent pace is not hard.

Its in the HSCA report.

The panel studied two photographs taken within minutes of the assassination. (63) While no human face or form could be detected in the sixth floor southeast window, the panel was able to conclude that a stack of boxes in the window had been rearranged during the interval of the taking of the two photographs

As the official story can only have this rearrangement of boxes done by Oswald, that means he hung around in the snipers nest for at least a minute after the shooting. This makes his meeting with Marion Baker, allegedly on the 2nd floor only 70-90 seconds after the assassination absolutely astonishing.

That some people are prepared to believe Oswald was a kind of semi magical being, capable of defying both the laws of physics and time, is fairly surprising to say the least.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Oswald did some pretty amazing things that day, now you're saying he washed his face without using his hands? The *palms* of his hands had more nitrates on than the backs. If he'd washed his face, he'd have washed the nitrates off his palms too.

Erm, he could have washed his face after he fired the rifle, but before he fired the revolver.

Besides, his landlady said he rushed into his room, then rushed straight out. She never said he used the bathroom.

Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on." I went and turned it on and I was trying to clear it up---I could hear them talking but I couldn't get the picture and he come in and I just looked up and I said, "Oh, you are in a hurry." He never said a thing, not nothing. He went on to his room and stayed about 3 or 4 minutes. [bolding mine]

(source)

Even granting for the sake of argument that her estimate is accurate, four minutes would likely have been sufficient time for Oswald to have changed his shirt, put on a jacket, and splashed water on his face in the bathroom. She also didn't follow him to observe whether he did or didn't enter the bathroom on his way to or from his room, and she was clearly preoccupied with the television at the time.