JFK Assassination

1. 0

   Rick Marlowposted 14 years ago

   Did Oswald act alone?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      dutchman1951posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Hard to say, the evidence has been so played with, and the films not very accurate, who knows now
      
      To me I agree with a recient documentary about LBJ. Jack and Bobby wanted Castro, he got to them first! may be some truth there, but who knows.

      replyreport
2. 0

   ralwusposted 14 years ago

   I can't say, who can for sure?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Ralwus, I thought a man of your wisdom would add a little more spice. Are you holding back?

      replyreport
3. 81

   dohn121posted 14 years ago

   Nope, there were at least 2 others involved...Since I don't want to get shot myself, I will not go into details
   
   Here's a hint: CIA

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I`ve shot a lot of weapons over the years and every target I hit moved in the direction of the bullet.The first rounds obviously came from behind as his body went into forward motion.But when the last round struck him in the forehead his body went backwards along with the back of his skull. My contention is of a forward shooter also,though not necessarily from the grassy knoll.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         dutchman1951posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I would say you are correct from the films that have been shown. Sure looks like more than 1 person in the films.

         replyreport
4. 0

   ralwusposted 14 years ago

   CIA is 3 more ain't it? LOL

   replyreport
5. 48

   wavegirl22posted 14 years ago

   ha and to think I always thought it was the Mob . .so I guess if you add the CIA and Oswald to the mob. . there you have it  . .3 which makes dohn right as usual

   replyreport
6. 0

   LEWJposted 14 years ago

   Did Oswald act alone?  I don't think so.    KILLING KENNEDY (BY HARRISON LIVINGSTONE) and HERITAGE OF STONE (BY JIM GARRISON) and BEST EVIDENCE (BY DAVID LIFTON) are among quite a few others which strongly identify the basic elements of conspiracy.     There are some undisputed facts that stand out in this murder case which investigations like the above are able to develop convincingly toward the conspiracy option.
   
   There are perhaps a million contrary  "facts" and arguments against the conspiracy option, but I've found that persistent study of the assassination diminishes those in favor of plausibility and the basic undisputed facts of the case.
   It does not seem basically above board when government officials who say they have nothing illegal to hide would, nevertheless, hide evidentiary documentation directly attached to  a murder case involving the head of state.
   
   The claim by such officials that national security interests prevented them from publishing the documents is revealed as nothing more than a generic political and judicial smoke screen when closely considered.     The assertion that American society would self-destruct upon finding out the hidden facts of this case is not a reasonable calculation.   If that were so, one might ask why has it not done so under the weight of all its other socio-psychological traumas?  Or why has it not done so despite the prevalence of its belief that this case involves high treason and conspiracy?
   
   Further, any retaliatory action taken against foreign agents involved in the assassination at any level, if there were any, would lie strictly within the power of the government, not within the grasp of the general population.  No matter how disturbed it were about the case or how vocal it became over it, the general population has no ability to order and execute a nuclear attack, covert operation or other judicial action designed to punish those it believed to be guilty in this case.  The idea that people would break into mass rioting that would end with the government overturned seems more reflective of fear originating within that government than of the probable outcome of revealed facts applying to this case.
   
   Besides the series of obvious, timely murders of material witnesses in this case, there are some key admissions of high officials on record that occurred after the fact which directly contradict their prior position on key points in the official investigation.   Certain of these admissions support the option of conspiracy by implication.  Hoover and Clay Shaw are among these.
   
   In my view, after years of personal study and contemplation of this subject, the Kennedy assassination is solved as a whole; all the key names, documents, and undisputed facts needed to solve it are publicly known.     All an interested person has to do is take enough time to seriously consider the disputed elements of this case in comparison with those that are undisputed on both sides.  The political atmosphere of that time period is one of those undisputed facts.  The puzzle falls clearly into place after such factors are considered.
   
   In the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the investigated results are not the ultimate issue.
   The enactment of due justice is what has remained elusive.  Perhaps irretrievably so.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      LEWJ, Thats an excellent reply and very inclusive. It appears you`ve given the subject much concideration over the years as I have .Thanks

      replyreport
7. 0

   A Texanposted 14 years ago

   Now this is an interesting thread, a Marine could have made at least one shot from his position but Oswald is said to have hit Kennedy 3 times, right? In the film you see Kennedy's head go backwards as if shot from the front, I would have to say at least one other shooter.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I used to have a 6.5 Carcano exactly like Oswald supposedly used and theres no way Oswald could have gotten off 3 rounds at that range even mounted in a bench rest,much less freehand.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I appreciate your reply, Rick, and yours, KCC.    I've read and heard that Oswald's supposed firing position was 88 yards away from the Kennedy car, that Oswald was not a good shot according to his marine records, that his palm print was'nt found on the claimed weapon until AFTER his death, that no gun powder residue was found anywhere on Oswald after the assassination, that several other rifles were claimed to also be the murder weapon soon after the assassination, that expert riflemen were unable to hit the target in 6 seconds at 88 yards distant, that Oswald was a CIA agent who knew David Ferry among other major players in the case, and that Oswald sent a Telex message warning of an assassination attempt against Kennedy just a few days before it happened.   After all this and more of a circumstantial kind is considered, it seems that the real question should be  "Did Oswald act AT ALL?," and the answer appears to be that he DID'NT act at all in the murder of Kennedy itself.
         
         The case of CIA agent Gary Underhill is to me one of the most dramatic and transparent elements in the case which points with painful confidence to a monstrous governmental conspiracy against John Kennedy.     
         All this does not even take into account that the official physician reports on the condition of the ex-president's corpse at the time of its initial examination show clear contradictions of its condition after it had been examined later at Bethesda by unqualified personnel.  These contradictions involve the location, size and type of the wounds inflicted on Kennedy's body, and have been publicly verified by the physicians involved in the initial exam.
         
         Nor is it yet mentioned that the original examination of the corpse was illegally controlled by top brass military personnel who repeatedly interrupted the efforts of the attendant physicians to perform the examination according to the standard requirements of their profession and the legal requirements of law.
         Nor is it yet mentioned that the forced and very hurried removal of Kennedy's body from Parkland Hospital by armed CIA agents was an unlawful act in breach of established state law.
         
         There is so much else that can be added to this topic which is unknown to the general public due to lack of interest and willingness to let others do all the thinking.
         The end results scream, beg and groan in anguish of CONSPIRACY.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            An eyewitness supposedly observed an individual dressed as a railworker behind the grassy knoll. This person was said to be carrying a long toolbox which he sat down and opened.FRom this box he assembled a rifle which the witness did not see fired but heard the report from the shot.He was seen to come back, dissemble the weapon, place it in the box and walk away.
            Now why would Oswald not have the same advantage to dispose of his weapon in like manner? and I was unaware of the missing gunpowder residue on Oswald.

            replyreport
8. 61

   tony0724posted 14 years ago

   I think It was Elvis !

   replyreport
   1. 0

      A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      or bigfoot

      replyreport
9. 78

   bgpappaposted 14 years ago

   Back and to the left, Back and to the left.
   
   I don't think so

   replyreport
   1. 0

      A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      What do you mean?

      replyreport
10. 0

    ralwusposted 14 years ago

    Ok, here it is, my wisdom as you have put it. Don't say the old lady screamed. Bring her on and let her scream. Johnson and J. Edgar had it done!

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Rick Marlowposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Now Ralwus, that`s what I`m talking about. I hoped more was forthcoming.

       replyreport
11. 85

    KCC Big Countryposted 14 years ago

    LEWJ did give a good reply.  That was almost a hub's worth.  Well done.

    replyreport
12. 61

    Pete Maidaposted 14 years ago

    The movie JFK posed a lot of interesitng questions.  The idea that I thought was unique was that JFK was considering ending the growing idea of the military industrual complex.
    I was considering pulling out of Vietnam and restructing and rethinking how defense money was spent.
    I have no more facts that anyone and I can't say if that had anything to do with his death, but it would have put an end to provate industries control of our defense.

    replyreport
13. 0

    LEWJposted 14 years ago

    The eyewitness you speak of was Lee Bowers, a railroad station employee who was up on the the lookout tower during the time of the assassination and who reported his impressions to the Warren Commission.     I'm not familiar with the assertion that he actually testified that he saw the assembly and disassembly of the rifle.    There's nothing on record I recall right now that reports the alleged assassination rifle as being found in a disassembled state.
    Publications such as those by Garrison and Livingstone deal with the problem of timing involved in the view that has Oswald performing the shooting and all the rest of what he'd have had to do to get out of the building as he did after the shots were fired.
    One or both of those publications also deals with the issue of the missing gunpowder residue.
    
    The fact that Oswald's prints were not on the murder weapon until after he'd died removes the relevance of any question about the probability of his actions in connection with it while he was alive.

    replyreport
14. 0

    Rick Marlowposted 14 years ago

    I left out that the man with the toolbox was seen to carry it away.

    replyreport
15. 60

    Jonathan Jancoposted 14 years ago

    Kennedy was proposing the total dismantling of the Federal Reserve, the private bank that charges us interest on our own currency. This is an institution that has Congress in their back pocket and they hate the U.S.A. because of our independent wealth.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for this info!  I knew Kennedy drafted papers set on the destruction of the CIA, but was unaware of this very courageous action against the powerful Federal Reserve.
       For me this only further adds to the portrait of conspiracy surrounding and, realistically, verifying his assassination.     How could a single man destroy the CIA, the Federal Reserve AND the Mafia, and in the political climate of that time also advocate peace with Communist nations, and yet live?
       His enemies would be too many and too powerful for his life to be sustained by natural means.   
       I found some info on Kennedy's 11110 Executive Order @ www.nwotruth.com/john-f-kennedy-vs-the- … -reserve/.
       Thanks much.

       replyreport
       1. 82

          manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Very interesting...here is this as well for folks to read and decide for them selves as well about: http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/index1.htm

          replyreport
16. 0

    Madame Xposted 14 years ago

    http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/headshot.htm
    
    Just a thought.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Though this clip is taken from a tampered version of the Zapruder film, it does highlight the plain dynamics of the fatal front-right headshot.  Fortunately, the co-conspirators were rushed for time and could'nt produce a less detectable fraud.    Illustrates the simple truth that murder is hard to completely and perfectly cover up.

       replyreport
17. 0

    bloodnlatexposted 14 years ago

    I hate to end the mystery, but I did it.  It was a delicate orchestra of ropes and levers triggering a series of well timed firing of guns.

    replyreport
18. 0

    LEWJposted 14 years ago

    Thanks, manlypoetryman.   I don't find Mr. Files convincing yet.   I just don't get it from his tone, his manner of expression, his general demeanor, nor his narrative details.
    But for many years many accounts have indeed pointed to a case for conspiracy in this assassination.    I personally appreciate Jim Garrison and his courageous work on the JFK case.

    replyreport
    1. 82

       manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yeah...I could see that...even if Files was not a 100% correct...it still makes way for many plausible explanations that it was a conspiracy by more than just Oswald...as the "lone shooter"...!

       replyreport
       1. 0

          LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Right...a gut feeling based on Files' eye movements while talking, his mistakes of speech, his perfectly smooth statements, and his basic appearance, warns me to proceed with extreme hesitancy before biting the bate.   Also, I doubt somebody would just up and so forthrightly speak out like he does if they were really part of the gun team.   Judging by the number and type of material witness deaths in this case they'd be dead by zero a.m., Dallas time.

          replyreport
19. 73

    EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 14 years ago

    There were reports of a "large, burly woman" running from the grassy knoll. So J. Edgar Hoover obviously was there to personally oversee the whole thing.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       ! !

       replyreport
    2. 82

       manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       As funny as that image is (although nothing really is funny on the atrocity that took place that day)...that would not surprise me...one bit!

       replyreport
    3. 0

       cosetteposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       omgsh....

       replyreport
20. 58

    Pr0metheusposted 14 years ago

    Driver... just watch the videos

    replyreport
    1. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What of the driver, Pr0metheus...?

       replyreport
       1. 58

          Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Watch any of the full videos (that have the driver in their view).... you can see him turn around, point a pistol over his right shoulder at the president, who is then hit with a bullet.  Don't take my word for it, go find the video and decide for yourself.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Can't vouch for that from any of the videos I've seen.

             replyreport
             1. 58

                Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DguBcLpWBS0
                
                Watch from 2:44 to 2:47 in HQ.... easy to see

                replyreport
                1. 73

                   EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Even if that wasn't a video that actually disputes the claim you're trying to prove, it would be the worst most ridiculous piece of "evidence" since the bit about them editing parts of the Zapruder film out and editing in new footage.

                   replyreport
                   1. 82

                      manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Eyeam4anarchy: So...You would say that there is no way the Zapruder film could have been edited?

                      replyreport
                      1. 73

                         EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         The Zapruder film was edited by Time magazine when they were creating still frames for the magazine. Three frames disappeared and another one was turned backwards in the process. But none of those frames involved the point in the film where Kennedy was shot and none of the experts who have examined the original three copies have found any signs of editing at those key points. So obviously I don't believe it's impossible.
                         
                         I was referring to one of the more absurd theories that the CIA re-enacted the Zapruder film with a look alike of Kennedy and then edited the original together with the re-enactment to hide the fact the shot came from the front. People actually bought into that just like some people are buying that a shiny spot on some guy's head is a gun.
                         
                         
                         That's the three frames that Time destroyed.
                         
                         
                         I like the sniper in the manhole theory, personally.

                         replyreport
                         1. 0

                            LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                            Convincing research on the Zapruder film has been done showing that a whole lot more has been done to it and by a different group of people---federal agents.  I agree that  the-driver-shot-Kennedy theory is an absurdity.  There's been a lot of discussion about the slow-down by the driver Greer, which to some is a surprised and confused reaction only.

                            replyreport
21. 82

    manlypoetrymanposted 14 years ago

    The driver could have turned around and shot the fatal head shot...the film frames that have been edited show...brake lights!

    replyreport
22. 58

    Pr0metheusposted 14 years ago

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DguBcLpWBS0
    
    Watch the first 10 seconds (keep your eyes on the driver).

    replyreport
23. 58

    Pr0metheusposted 14 years ago

    The Feds wanted him dead....

    replyreport
24. 0

    A Texanposted 14 years ago

    That video does not show the driver shoot anyone, it does show in great detail where both of the drivers hands are though, and they are not pointing backwards.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       orly
       
       It's not like poeple have two hands.... did you actually watch the video?
       
       You can clearly see his arm come up, and him point a silver metallic object towards the president.... then he dies.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Guess orly means something to you? The driver? Why not Jaquelyn Kennedy? Jonjon? Where was Robert that day? The possibilities are endless.

          replyreport
          1. 58

             Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Watch the video, at the times mentioned (2:45)... you can clearly see him point a gun backwards towards the president, who then gets shot.

             replyreport
             1. 0

                A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Watched and re-watched and never saw his hand come up! Do you think the Governor or his wife might have heard the shot REAL CLOSE TO THEIR HEADS??? Goodluck trying to get this gem of a conspiracy off the ground.

                replyreport
       2. 0

          A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          No, you can't clearly see that!

          replyreport
          1. 58

             Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Are you watching in HQ?  What do you see?  What's the silver thing that appears by his head when he lifts his arm?

             replyreport
25. 0

    LEWJposted 14 years ago

    I was just thinking about the Files guy;  I recall that as soon as I heard it on the news when it first came out it sounded unlikely.     Anybody involved at that level who disclosed true info about the gun team's activity at a Dealey Plaza  would endanger the whole conspiracy plot.
    And would most likely vanish quickly with most of the rest of the key material witnesses.
    Don't really think the conspirators would rely on reverse effect and conclude that Files would be unbelievable, and just leave him alone.    Too risky.

    replyreport
    1. 82

       manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yes!!! Way too risky...! he would have had an accident for sure. Still...a  lot of what says...

       replyreport
26. 58

    Pr0metheusposted 14 years ago

    Ok what is his left arm doing then?  What is the silver thing by his head?  Your a texan you mist have been to a shooting range?  Do you know how much of a decible difference there is between a 22 and a sniper rifle?   22s sound like cap guns.  Watch the video without your bias towards me and maybe your brain will let you see.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       There is no bias towards you, I watched at your suggestion in HQ and never see his arm move. Lets say for the sake of argument he actually had a gun in his hand, that would seem very logical to me because the driver is security for the President. Yes I know what a 22 sounds like compared to a sniper rifle and I also know that a 22 would not have blown his skull apart like it was.

       replyreport
27. 82

    manlypoetrymanposted 14 years ago

    One excerpt or photo shows the second car behind the President's telling the Secret Service guys to get off the back of the car bumper (Which would have greatly interfered with shots from all directions...ie. especially the rear) One of the S.S. guys questioned it while walking back to the second car. I don't remember if the driver was an SS guy...but the Zapruder Film show continual movement of the President's car...except for Brake lights in one frame (the film was edited..but it couldn't be done perfectly!) If you believe the SS was involved...and I do...then it would be very likely to make sure whoever was driving also made sure the assasination was carried out...if all else went wrong. They="the conspirators" counted on all the confusion, and all the collection of cameras taken at the scene of the crime, and eye-witness accounts to be confusing because of what folks had just witnessed,...because "the Conspirators" knew the inner-workings of an investigation. They manipulated the whole scene from the second JFK turned into Dealey Plaza...until the Warren Commission report...and beyond! (Not to mention the planning in advance)

    replyreport
    1. 0

       A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       So you think that SS agents willingly put themselves at risk to kill Kennedy? I believe there was a conspiracy but I do not believe the agents assigned to protect the President were involved.

       replyreport
       1. 82

          manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I know, I know...it is very hard to believe...but look at the final outcome...2009...and we still can't fingerpoint exactly...and its not like it has been thoroughly researched...points at an inside job...with additional conspirators...especially ones doing the investigation!

          replyreport
       2. 58

          Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          They were probably ordered to.  I don't know why they did it.  I suppose your right, the driver could have been just looking to protect him, but then why would he point the gun at him a second before he died?  Also it is possible that the gun would do that kid of damage if it did not enter his skull at a direct angle, and passed through his skull towards the side (not to mention if he was using special round).  That alone doesn't account for the multiple-gunshot possibility too.
          
          I'm sure the ones closest to the president weren't involved, but if they were ordered by a superior officer to move, they would have done it (and not known they were contributing).

          replyreport
          1. 0

             A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             First, I do not see the arm move, a 22 would not destroy the head in that manner. I have investigated many Homicides and many done with a 22, it just does not do that kind of damage. More than likely there was somebody in front of the vehicle and 2 to the rear creating a triangular field of fire, the one with the best shot would have done it, maybe they all had a good shot.

             replyreport
             1. 82

                manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                A Texan : Think out of the box...think like none of us know really exactly how all this went down...Think like none of us were there...Think like it was a masterful plan. How do you know if all Secret Service men are innocent of not helping in the conspiracy...That's the first time I ever read that the "possibility" of the driver making a shot was confirmed a .22. Do you think that LBJ might have any type of inclination that this was going down? That's all I would ask you to do...is think outside the box. Them that did it...sure did. No way was it one lone gunman!

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   I believe there was a conspiracy but the driver was not the shooter and that video proves it. I gave how this probably happened above, I doubt very seriously it could have happened any other way!

                   replyreport
                   1. 82

                      manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Hey A Texan: That's cool...at least you gave it some good thought No one has all the answers to explain what occurred that fateful day...I only know that many times in my life..i wished someone did have all the answers (To how it went down!).

                      replyreport
             2. 58

                Pr0metheusposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                It could have been a larger caliber pistol too.  With 2 sniper rifles going off, I doubt the people near the driver would have been able to differentiate between a closer 38 special round and the larger caliber sniper rifles.  If 3 shots went off, then it is also likely that a different shot caused the damage, the pistol just added to it.  We'll never know, as his brain was 'lost'.
                
                I see it pretty clearly.  Picture pointing a gun over your back shoulder and lifting your arm in front of your head.  His arm makes the exact same movement and a silver, gun like, object appears next to his head.  It seems pretty clear to me.
                
                
                
                In this picture I drew a line showing where the drivers arm is, and circled his hand holding the pistol.  This can be seen in the video.

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   That is his arm doing nothing more than steering the car! The Governor and his wife would have seen and felt a 38/22 or any other kind of weapon go off. This entire video is about discounting the driver as the shooter, I give up believe what you want too. That is a glare from the sun on the passengers head and the drivers head, unless you are saying the driver shot from behind his back.

                   replyreport
    2. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I pick up your comments particularly at the point about the conspiratorial manipulation of the shooting scenes.   That was a must-do item.   But they botched it, as expert filmists have effectively pointed out.

       replyreport
28. 82

    manlypoetrymanposted 14 years ago

    Texan: Look at the link I put under LEWJ back a page or so ago...You don't have to take it verbatim...it does some eye-opening though!

    replyreport
29. 58

    Pr0metheusposted 14 years ago

    Do you see now?

    replyreport
30. 73

    EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 14 years ago

    The specifics are pretty much never going to be confirmed, but the simple fact is the CIA set it up, while the Mob did the dirty work. Oswald was a decoy, who probably never came close to even hitting the car let alone Kennedy.

    replyreport
31. 0

    LEWJposted 14 years ago

    Some authorities on the subject point out that the unnatural jump in footage seen in the Zapruder film at the point where Kennedy's car reaches the Stimmons sign is the result of tampered film frames.    I always had gotten a feeling that something was odd about that portion of the film but did not realize what that was.  Then the film was clearly analyzed and shown with clear explanations.    That jump in the film looks like deleted footage, same as in some old movies wherein scenes suddenly jump or skip forward to a frame in which the characters don't have the postures or grooming shown prior to the jump a micro second ago.   One gets the feeling that the Zapruder film reveals, not an incidental jump, but a fixed jump forward that conveniently hides critical activity from view at just the time it happens.  A minor film stutter or incidental unsteadiness do not hide evidence AND change the actual  position of sunlight and signs on a road.
    
    For instance, there's convincing online and printed data highlighting how the Zapruder film of the Kennedy car shows the street signs shaded wrongly by sunlight as well as artificially angled off their natural tangent in some frames during the car's movement along Dealey plaza.   The top-edge tangent and the shading of the signs in the footage are contradictory to both common sense and the laws of physics.
    At least one of the street signs show shadows and sunlight coming from the wrong direction, against the tangent of the noon sun.    Evidence of fraud becomes plain when this information is closely considered.

    replyreport
32. 59

    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years ago

    How was JFK assassinated? It is the duty of investigating agencies to find out. They may have done it already and may have shaded something in the findings.
    
    But why was he assassinated? Is it for his Pro-black policies? For human rights? For anti-slavery policy? It is the main question worrying people all over the world.
    
    It may be something personal and political, I think.

    replyreport
    1. 82

       manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA: I think it was multi-reasons that culminated against him...both for his actions...and for his appointed time to be President...(in another era...who knows what great things he could have accomplished...undetterred!) It was a troubled time for our country and the planet...IMO.
       
       Also...back at what LEWJ posted on the Federal Reserve...that alone could have been the ticket. How is it that it goes on every TV Cop investigation: "Follow the money trail!"

       replyreport
       1. 59

          VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          For your knowledge, it is not a troubled time for your country alone... While JFK was busily engaged with Russian navy in the Atlantic, here in the eastern part of the globe, China unexpectedly sent a huge army into Indian territories and gobbled up a large area... Only after the US-Russian engagement ended, the fact came out to the world and China was forced to retreat to some extent. Those lands still remain with them seeking liberation by India. India cannot forget JFK.

          replyreport
          1. 82

             manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Wow...did not know that...Thanks. I do concur that it was not a troubled time for our country alone...I believe that it was a bad time period for all...for sure!

             replyreport
             1. 59

                VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                One more thing for your knowledge...  Throughout history, all invaders came to India on the invitation of insiders and were assisted to win the local ruler.... This is the only case where India had to lose territories, that too because Chinese pretended as a close friend while sending the army. Other than this there was no military defeat for India. (Colonisation of India cannot be treated as victory for the outsider)

                replyreport
33. 61

    Below-average Joeposted 14 years ago

    I have read a lot on the JFK assassination and have to admit that the more I read, the less I know what to think.
    
    However, it's interesting that the Zapruder film has been used by conspiracy buffs for years as proof that there was a conspiracy.  Then when their claims are proven false, they claim that the Zapruder film is hoax, some even claiming that Zapruder wasn't even there!  It seems odd that someone would bother editing out only one or two frames of film to hide a conspiracy.  One frame of film = 1/18 of a second.  If I'm gonna try to hide a conspiracy, I'm gonna edit more than one of two frames to make sure it's done right.
    
    Also, has anyone here ever been to Dealey Plaza?  Was there this past summer and the stockade fence on the Knoll is less than 50 feet away from where Zapruder was standing and less than 20 feet from the sidewalk steps where others were standing.  If anyone shot from the fence on the knoll, there would have been no question about it.  Somebody would have POSITIVELY seen someone there, no vague statements or conjectures.  "There may have been someone up there" or "I saw a puff of smoke".  Somebody definitely would have seen someone.
    
    It's a huge empty lot behind the fence, just as it was in 1963.  There's nowhere to run and hide.  And noone shooting from there would have had time to fire, disassemble a rifle, stash it in something and then make a getaway without someone seeing them.  There just isn't enough time and nowhere to go.
    
    I'm not saying Oswald did it alone (the facts the J Edgar swooped in and quickly declared Oswald acted alone and that Hoover loathed the Kennedys are very curious and suspicious), but I find it hard to believe anyone firing from the knoll can disppear that quickly never to be seen and identified.
    
    Maybe the puff of smoke was him disappearing?  Hmmm....

    replyreport
    1. 82

       manlypoetrymanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       You make great points...and that is why no one ever really figures this out completely. It seems that all great conspiracies...or perceived conspiracies...never really get proven one way or the other. That in itself is perplexing. Were the planners of big conspiracies so smart that they thought of everything and could never be traced? Or are there never any big conspiracies...just alot of paranoid folks?
       
       That to me is the biggest "speller-out" (for lack of better term) that many conspiracies are inside jobs...who best to control the aftermath and subsequent investigation...but the investigators ...?
       
       Consider what you said about the "run and hide" part to your explanation. What if you didn't "run and hide"...but in the midst of all the confusion...you handed a weapon off to an innocent by-stander...(who passed it off a 100 times more...or
       whatever it took to have that weapon dissappear.) and then the shooter...automatically becomes the person on hand...asking people that just witnessed the most horrible murder of their lifetime...questions and gathering up cameras and other evidence?
       
       That sounds pretty confusing to me...! Anyways...that's all I'm saying...is to think on it...on a grander "major-thoroughly-planned" scale. Who knows if someday...if an average citizen who has studied all the facts...doesn't figure it all out...undisputably?

       replyreport
    2. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       The idea behind altering the film would be to delete the minimum amount of footage in order  to minimize detection later.   
       
       Over 50 witnesses present in the immediate area of the assassination testified to hearing a shot from the knoll.
       
       Lee Bowers Jr. testified to the Warren Commission that HE saw men at the knoll fence who pulled up in 2 cars some time  before the shooting occurred.   He reported having the impression that some sort of commotion  occurred down in that area immediately after the shots were fired in Dealey Plaza and reported seeing what seemed to him to be a puff of smoke at that moment in the area of the knoll fence.  Bowers was a railroad attendant stationed within eyeshot of the knoll fence area up on the lookout tower that day.  Others also report a smoke cloud near the fence after all the shots had been fired.
       
       Reports on the knoll issue generally indicate that the rush up the knoll to the fence was not instantaneous with the shot heard.
       
       Escaping notice and getting out of the knoll area would be no major task in a pre-planned situation wherein the area had been secured off limits by authorities beforehand and a crowd below the area had been stunned by an overt act of murder against a popular President they'd seen alive and well seconds before.

       replyreport
34. 68

    mkottposted 14 years ago

    Oswald did not act alone.  Who is responsible?  Why was he assassinated?  There are multiple possibilities.  Is it possible those that wanted him out of the way got together and made deals?  One thought as to why there were multiple shooters because no one would know who actually killed him and it would also insure cooperation among those that made the deal to assassinate him.  Of course multiple shooters increases the chance of success.  Why was Oswald allowed to go too USSR during the height of the Cold War?  Kennedy wanting to end the Vietnam War and those getting rich didn't like it.  Castro? Mafia?   Was someone close to the President in on it?  J Edgar Hoover?  LBJ?   
    
    There are more questions than answers.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       dutchman1951posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I agree mkot

       replyreport
35. 62

    johnb0127posted 14 years ago

    The Badge Man did it.  If you do not agree, how do you explain the mysterious smoke behind the white pickett fence and the way JFK flew back when he was shot?

    replyreport
36. 0

    LEWJposted 14 years ago

    CORRECTION:  LEE BOWERS CITED  AND  DESCRIBED  3  CARS  AND  OCCUPANTS  IN  THEM  MOVING  BACK  AND  FORTH  FROM  NEAR NOON UNTIL THE  ASSASSINATION  IN THE VICINITY OF THE RAILROAD TOWER.   HE REPORTED  2 MEN  STANDING  NEAR THE KNOLL  FENCE  SHORTLY BEFORE THE SHOTS WERE FIRED.   HE MENTIONED  "A FLASH OF LIGHT OR SMOKE OR SOMETHING" HE  SAW  IN  THE KNOLL  AREA AT  THAT TIME,  CAUSING HIM TO FEEL THAT  "SOMETHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY HAD OCCURRED  THERE."

    replyreport
    1. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       And reports say there WAS a rush to the knoll; I still think there was time for a getaway, though; the facts say that at least 1 shot came from there, and that a fake Secret Service agent and 3 so-called tramps, hiding, were found in that area shortly after the shooting.
       The "tramps" were all freed.    The shot heard by so many witnesses is more convincing than the smoke puff, though.  The smoke puffs can be explained away but not the shot heard, despite the tricky acoustical effect of gunfire claimed by some.

       replyreport
37. 64

    maxoxam41posted 14 years ago

    It is surprising that everybody still wonders if Kennedy was assassinated or no. All evidences shown or hidden concur irrefutably that the CIA, the executive branch of the US government, was solely responsible.
    In a time where the cold war reached its climax, Kennedy did not want to press the "declare war" button especially after the "Bay of Pigs" failure, and reaffirmed to the CIA's head Hoover, his authority, his power, his independence.
    In a time of civil rights' uprising and rioting, Kennedy instead of the usual beating stick policy tended an ear to listen to his citizen. Probably another act of defiance towards the CIA.
    If you refer to history, and more in particular on the international scene, the US, far from brandishing the banner of freedom, opted more for coups and assassinations of people, or governments that did not agree with their ideas. So why would it be different on its own soil? Kennedy, as a young catholic, defied with his new views of the world, the old political establishment.The old "school of Chicago" way of thinking: anticommunist,antisocial,"antifreedom". In summary, the hardliners of power.
    Kennedy as Oswald were expendable! And history proved it. Kennedy was replaced by puppet Johnson and the CIA regained its once lost power. As for Oswald, his personality (not the quiet American) made him the best weapon to be used against himself! In a country that just raised from the ashes of the MacCarthyism's damages, that was tensed because the USSR was pointing defensive nuclear heads, Oswald was the ideal target. He was communist, married to a Russian.
    What amazed me is the diligence with which the media and the public lynched him. In a video shooting of the last days of Oswald, he loudly barks at the journalists that at no moment was he allowed legal representation. He was forbidden access to any form of judicial representation. Doesn't it say a lot about the US democracy and the representation of its constituency?

    replyreport
    1. 59

       VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Criminals, killers and law breakers deserve no legal representation. Even if a lawyer was appointed, will he justify his actions? He will only twist things and prolong the case.

       replyreport
    2. 0

       LEWJposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Some good points, maxoxam41.     Some researchers show Oswald as a fake communist,  being prepared as a patsy early on by the real conspirators. The political times had much to do with the conspiracy to assassinate this President, and Oswald proves to be the scapegoat rather than the assassin after close examination.  One thing commonly overlooked is that Oswald was never proven guilty, but was FORCED to be anyway.    So many people never thoughtfully question that curious foreground object in the picture.

       replyreport
       1. 50

          saberjetposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          LEWJ, I'VE VIEWED SEVERAL PROGRAMS ON ASSASSINATIONS. ALL WHO KILLED THEY'ER INTENDED LEADERS, WHEN CAPTURED WERE VERY PROUND OF WHAT THEY HAD DONE. OSWALD APPEARED TO BE
          CONFUSED, WHEN PLACED BEFORE THE CAMERAS. THIS ONLY PROVED TO ME THAT HE WAS A FALL GUY...I WAS A SENIOR IN HIGH SCHOOL AT THE TIME OF KENNEDYS DEATH. I'VE WATCHED OUR COUNTRY SINK SINCE. THAT DEATH DID CHANGE HISTORY, AND STILL IS.
          SABERJET 10-21-2010

          replyreport
38. 0

    ahorsebackposted 13 years ago

    Here's a new theory for you conspiracy nut's . I was there !!! What? You ask???? Yes, I was there. In the second grade of a small school in New England. But , heres something for you to chew on ; How come Kennedy was instantly "hero-ized" immediately America's school children were flooded with pamphlets stories and pictures in The "Weekly Reader" style of pamplets about the great leader of the free world , our hero , rising from a hero soldier to the presidency. And yet he was just like every other political zelot. A prehistoric Clinton , womanizing in the whitehouse with college girls, a prescription drug addict , a power monger who put his own brother in charge of the nations top law enforcement agency. On and on, The great Kennedy of the 'camelots' immagery,  A rummrunners son grown rich and powerful from old money. Come on folks !, this country needs to get on a fast track to maturity , stop celebratizing  political office holders and grow up about chosing true leaders to bring our country back on track. Kennedy would have won "american idol" ,yes . But, was he a true patriot ? And, does he deserve to be cannonized? Yet. Politics, popularity , and the rewritten facts of history . Go ahead everyone drink your cool-aid.

    replyreport
39. 60

    Pollyannalanaposted 13 years ago

    Hoover hated them and I don't think I trusted Johnson all that much. I am sure many were involved. The Kennedy boys were going after the mafia and I am not sure I believe Oswald had anything to do with it, I think he was idiot enough to be used and make it seem so but killed before he could be questioned, his wife said he thought highly of Kennedy. I feel sure many in government know much they don't tell and they made sure they got both of them and what threat was Teddy? Yes JFK was a womanizer even with a broken back and a wonderful wife and how many of those are in the world? I hated that about him but what does that have to do with his assassination? They were our only chance to have a cleaned up government, now there is none.

    replyreport
40. 60

    sir slaveposted 13 years ago

    the whole thing was a huge conspiracy to keep america on the militaized trajectory that it followed, as orwell said a nation at war is a nation easy to mobilize.

    replyreport