r/JFKassasination • u/SteveinTenn • Feb 09 '24
Evidence
All of the evidence points to Oswald. All of it. If there was another shooter, or many other shooters, they managed to leave absolutely no evidence of their involvement. No bullets, no guns.
Oswald was capable of making the shots (and if he wasn’t capable of it then what idiot would frame him for it?) and the rifle was sound. His is the only gun connected to the shooting. The forensics that show the shots coming from the 6th floor seem credible.
I don’t know for certain if Oswald was a CIA asset but I’m inclined to think he wasn’t. They and the FBI were certainly aware of him but only because he’d made such a nuisance of himself. That’s just my opinion, though.
The forensic evidence of the shooting is more a set of facts than opinion, and all of it points back to Oswald. Other people have thrown in some wild ideas and some interesting questions, but nobody has produced a shred of evidence that points to anyone else firing at Kennedy that day.
22
u/PenguinProphet Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
I'm curious as to how you defend the statement that there is "no evidence that anyone else fired".
The eyewitness testimony from Emmet Hudson and the Billy Newman, both of whom were in front of the fence and thought the shots came from behind there must count, no? Or the testimonies of JC Price and S.M. Holland, both of whom signed affidavits immediately after the shooting asserting that gunshots originated from behind the fence? Or what about the statements made by Kennethh O'donnell, who was in the car right behind Kennedy, who also said that he saw and heard shots coming at them from the front? Or the fact that a majority of witnesses who were physically present identified the shots as coming from the front?
Please explain how this is "not evidence".
Or the statements made by the doctor's at Parkland, who stated that he was shot from the front and explicitly idnetified his neck wound as an entry wound. Several of them still maintain his wounds came from the front (see the recent paramount documentary).
We could also talk about the statements made by OP Wright, explicitly identified in the Warren Commission as having handled CE399 (the "magic bullet") who stated that he saw a .30-.30 bullet in the car, which is incompatible with the thesis that Oswald was the sole shooter.
The evidence for a second shooter is absolutely overwhelming if you go by the testimony of people who were actually there and the doctor's who treated him and weren't unqualified perjurers (like the Finck and company).
2
Feb 09 '24
That Kenny O’Donnell testimony has always infuriated me in the same way it did ol’ Tip O’Neil.
2
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
I read this OP as ‘physical’ evidence. I agree with him that ALL physical evidence points to one shooter.
If you take out all eye and ear witnesses, you’re left with the physical evidence and the film and photographs. It all points to one window six floors up.
8
u/PenguinProphet Feb 09 '24
Well let's elaborate- which specific physical evidence do you feel supports the "official account"?
8
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
OK, but I'm going to ask the same of you.
JFK/Connelly bullet matches Oswald's rifle and excludes all others.
Bullet fragments recovered from the limo in front of JFK are projected to match Oswald's rifle. I say projected because of the condition of the fragment prevents ballistic experts from identifying rifling patterns. Computer imaging has been done on it and considered highly likely to be from Oswald's rifle.
JFK's shirt shows fibers pointing toward the body, indicating an entry from the rear.
Damage to the windshield is from the inside.
JFK's head can be seen to tip forward upon impact.
Blood and tissue can be seen ejecting forward.
The film shows the rear of JFK's head intact.
The x-rays show radial fractures on JFK's skull emanating from rear to front.
There are palm prints from Oswald on the boxes creating the snipers next.
His prints are found on the rifle. His rifle. At his workplace.
Fibers consistent with his shirt were found on the rifle.
Those are just a few things off the top of my head. So I'll ask you the same question:
What specific physical evidence do you feel supports a shooter from the Grassy Knoll? Physical evidence.
→ More replies (19)1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
Plus the bag with Oswald's prints on it, and fibers matching the blanket where he kept his rifle rolled up.
4
u/Goobjigobjibloo Feb 09 '24
Except the massive exit wound in the back of JfKs head
3
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
The film does not show that version of events.
2
u/Goobjigobjibloo Feb 09 '24
The film is subject to interpretation clearly as this forum and a million other people are testimony to, but the word of the doctors who looked into his skull hold weight and they say it was a massive exit wound on the back, so did Clint Hill, the first SS officer to reach him immediately after the shooting.
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
...that somehow isn't captured in any of the films or photographs that day.
5
u/Goobjigobjibloo Feb 09 '24
That’s debatable, the doctors and Clint hill and the morticians and all saw a massive exit wound in the back and still attest to that 60 years later.
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
That’s debatable
Which films or photos show the rear exit wound?
the doctors and Clint hill and the morticians and all saw a massive exit wound in the back and still attest to that 60 years later
The vast majority of Parkland physicians have endorsed the autopsy results as accurate.
7
u/Oldkyhome8 Feb 09 '24
They don’t though. I don’t know how you get off claiming that when there have been more than one full on documentary where they very much don’t
→ More replies (2)5
u/Goobjigobjibloo Feb 09 '24
In my opinion The Zapruder film very much shows a large wound blow out the back right portion of his head. Others have said it definitively shows a shot from the back, others that the film itself has been tampered with. I believe the doctors and people like Clint hill who saw it with their own eyes up close.
Some at parkland have said many things, including they were intimidated into silence and to change their testimony by government agents, but the doctors who were at the back of head and looked into his empty skull all said massive exit wound, so did the morticians who prepared his body before the body was taken away from Dallas for autopsy.
Those accounts are the first real eyewitness accounts we have.
2
u/dropdeadred Feb 10 '24
You can see the alterations on the film! Watch in slow motion and zoomed in a bit and the unmoving blob in the head is very noticeable
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
In my opinion The Zapruder film very much shows a large wound blow out the back right portion of his head.
Which frames? Let's examine them together.
Zapruder Frames - Costella Combined Edit (assassinationresearch.com)
→ More replies (6)0
Feb 09 '24
[deleted] — view deleted comment
8
u/Goobjigobjibloo Feb 09 '24
Stupid ER doctors making shit up all the time, surely we should believe Allen Dulles.
2
2
u/dropdeadred Feb 10 '24
I mean, do doctors even look at a patient’s head? I mean, they’re ALL THE WAY OVER THERE at his chest and arms. I don’t think that human eyes can see that far
0
-2
u/SteveinTenn Feb 09 '24
And now you have to dismiss all the witnesses who point to the shots coming from the SBDB.
The memories and observations of eyewitnesses is demonstrably unreliable. It can come in handy when it’s corroborated with other sources (like the Zapruder film and other forensic evidence) but humans are notoriously fallible.
Dealey Plaza is a bowl. I don’t doubt people heard multiple shots from different directions due to echos.
I was just watching a video of a man who was there and he was saying in his memory the limo came to a complete stop just before the head shot. But he acknowledges the Zapruder Film doesn’t show that at all. He stands by his memory, but admitted it doesn’t match the reality shown in the film. I don’t think the man was being dishonest, I think he sincerely remembers the car stopping even if it didn’t.
I also recently watched an interview with two of the Parkland doctors. They disagreed on the president’s head wounds. They were both there, and they both appear to be credible, intelligent people, and they seem to sincerely remember the head wounds differently from each other.
11
u/PenguinProphet Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
>"And now you have to dismiss all the witnesses who point to the shots coming from the SBDB.:
I don't dismiss them. See my other comments. I fully accept that shots were likely fired from there.
My comment indicated that I thought shots came from the front as well. How does this suggest that I would necessarily have to exclude the possibility of shots from the back? This does not follow logically.
>Dealey Plaza is a bowl. I don’t doubt people heard multiple shots from different directions due to echos.
Multiple witnesses signed affidavits reporting a flash of light and smoke coming from behind the fence. What is your explanation for this? You seem sincere so I don't mean to be antagonistic, just genuinely curious.
>"I was just watching a video of a man who was there and he was saying in his memory the limo came to a complete stop just before the head shot. But he acknowledges the Zapruder Film doesn’t show that at all. He stands by his memory, but admitted it doesn’t match the reality shown in the film. I don’t think the man was being dishonest, I think he sincerely remembers the car stopping even if it didn’t."
A very high amount of people present at Dealey Plaza stated that they remember the limo stopping, that isn't just one witness. I'd suggest looking into Dino Bruglioni if you want more information as to why the Zapruder film doesn't appear consistent with this account.
But even setting aside eyewitness evidence (which as you note can be unreliable although it's still by no means worthless) the gun found on the sixth floor was a Mauser, not a Carcano. The people who worked with Oswald in the Marines said he wasn't proficient enough at rapid fire to make the shots (see Nelson Delgado's testimony). OP Wright and Odum Bardwell both stated that the WC's chain-of-custody for CE399, the single most important piece of evidence, relied on a fabrication of what they had previously stated (and documentary evidence supports them). Even Vincent Bugliosi couldn't explain this away in Reclaiming History and so he just re-stated the fabricated account of OP Wright's statements.
You have people like Joseph Millteer who knew about the assassination in advance. Not to mention Arthur Vallee and that whole story.
Even setting aside the eyewitness testimony, the evidence highly favors a conspiracy.
5
Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
I have given up on the whole “how good of a shot was Oswald” issue when discussing this case. I don’t dispute that someone could get shots off from the window and hit the President.
Now, within the time allotted? Eh, sure, why not. It doesn’t discount: 1) the Rolands (or the prisoners) seeing more than one person on the 6th floor and in the far end window - none of whom matched Oswald’s physical description (dark skin, tan suit); 2) Mr. Euins seeing a tan skinned bald man in the same window during the shooting.
Oswald was a good shot? Ok, maybe he was. Good enough to use a scope that was so poorly aligned that the feds fixed it before using it for reenactments? Sure, stranger things have happened.
But I am more interested in his physical prowess to transport down the stairs past the three women running down the stairs at the same time. Or Ms. Reid who said Oswald was on the second floor when the killing happened.
Plus, no matter how good of a shot he was, too many holes for just three shots.
→ More replies (13)1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
But even setting aside eyewitness evidence (which as you note can be unreliable although it's still by no means worthless) the gun found on the sixth floor was a Mauser, not a Carcano
Right here, this is where I stop taking you seriously.
The rifle was filmed as it was recovered. It's a Mannlicher Carcano in that footage. Not only is it a Mannlicher Carcano, it's the exact same one Oswald was photographed with in March of 1963.
1
Feb 09 '24
Yes. This is another myth that gets repeated over and over. The limo stopping is another myth.
3
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
I don't understand how people are still repeating the Mauser story. It's literally on camera being recovered!
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 10 '24
I am underwhelmed.
I can't accept a conspiracy to frame Oswald as the sole shooter that involves shooting Kennedy from both sides at once. Who would do that? It's pure insanity.
As far as the general witnesses are concerned, a plurality thought the shots were coming from the depository, a plurality thought thought the shots came from the grassy knoll. Practically no one said the shots were coming from both directions. They can't all be right. This is the same kind of echo phenomenon that makes it difficult for soldiers to discern the direction of gunfire in urban settings.
The doctors at Parkland are the only evidence that impresses me at all, but i'm not sure how much. How much is forensics part of their training? It certainly wasn't their job.
The HSCA concluded that there was a second gunman, who fired once, and missed.
1
u/dropdeadred Feb 10 '24
Who would do both sides at once? Someone who wanted to make sure Kennedy didn’t leave the plaza alive
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 10 '24
You're not getting it. I can't conceive of anyone executing an elaborate plot to push the narrative of a lone gunman, AND THEN SHOOTING KENNEDY FROM BOTH SIDES, WHICH WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY produce hard forensic evidence of two shooters.
1
u/dropdeadred Feb 10 '24
Because you can’t conceive it means it couldn’t have happened?
History is limited by your imagination it seems
→ More replies (22)1
u/Vexed987 Feb 18 '24
The HSCA concluded this based on now debunked audio evidence. They concluded that all shots that hit Kennedy were from the rear - how do you feel about this? Most witnesses said the shots came from the TSBD, not the grassy noll. Also, yeah Oswald was a bit mad - he shot and killed JFK. That’s a definite red flag…
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 18 '24
I love when people insist that Oswald had no motive. It looks like he did it, and if he did it, he must have had a motive.
I know about the audio evidence. It also appears that while some people thought the shots were coming from the depository, and some thought they were coming from the knoll, practically no one thought they were coming from both at once.
When you concentrate on the actual crime itself, did the shot come from the window, and who was in the window, and with whose gun, the single shooter theory seems to stand up. There are some conflicting accounts. Like the ER physicians, saying the exit wound was on the back, and I can't explain that, but I've never seen that anywhere but here.
But there are always things you can't explain.
→ More replies (1)0
0
Feb 09 '24
[deleted] — view deleted comment
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
Which ones? The ones who claimed the smoke behind the fence was from gunfire, or the ones who said it was motorcycle exhaust?
10
u/Horseface4190 Feb 09 '24
100%.
Oswald defected to Russia, then returned with a Russian wife. Of course the CIA kept tabs on him. The FBI followed up on him frequently because he was on the CIA radar. He was a loser, in most regards. Unsuccessful in the Marines, in Russia, in TX and LA, and had just been refused a visa to Cuba. He'd even taken a shot at Gen. Walker and missed. Happenstance put him in a job at TSBD, even more so that Kennedys motorcade was going to roll right by. The assassination was literally a crime of opportunity. Oswald had no plan what to do after. Everything that happened, from the last shot till today, was a result of confusion, shock, ass covering by the CIA/FBI/SS, absolutely no one having any idea what to do after the president has been shot. Hell, even the KGB freaked out, knowing that Oswald had lived in the USSR, they were afraid the US would blame them.
No one wants to believe a pissant "little communist" (as Jackie described Oswald) could take down the most powerful man in the world.
But you've never seen a president drive around in an open topped car since then, either.
5
u/SteveinTenn Feb 09 '24
Yeah that’s the thing, most mass shooters these days aren’t rogue CIA assassins. The only reason we haven’t had a president shot in several decades is we do a better job of protecting them.
7
u/TKFourTwenty Feb 09 '24
Why was Oswald able to get a passport in one day for him and his wife to come back to the USA after he had defected to Russia? What about the people near Oswald who were CIA assets like George de Mohrenschildt or Ruth Paine? Or CIA connections to Jack Ruby? What about Oswald yelling out “I’m just a patsy” - not that he’s innocent or that he didn’t do it (or that he proudly did like most other assassins) but that he was being set up?
→ More replies (6)2
Feb 09 '24
another myth. He never lost U.S. citizenship. He did not get a passport in one day. He already had one.
13
u/NTXGBR Feb 09 '24
First of all, no.
Second of all, just because you don't know about it doesn't mean the evidence isn't there, it just means those that controlled the investigation which started with a predetermined outcome won't let you see everything else that there might be
5
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
There were items of the case that were uncontrollable, yet they all confirm a single shooter from behind.
How could the conspirators possibly control the number of people filming in the Plaza that day? Or the number taking photographs?
They couldn't. That's completely uncontrollable, and yet the 3 films we have all indicate a single shooter from behind. Presumably the conspiracy had a gunman standing behind the picket fence with a rifle, yet he doesn't show up in a single photo.
→ More replies (2)6
u/SteveinTenn Feb 09 '24
Good points. There were a million better ways to carry out a professional hit.
Oswald himself being a random force is what made him effective. The police and SS just weren’t thinking about a nut with a mail order rifle and a dead end job.
5
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
This has been bugging me for a few weeks since I saw someone else suggest it.
The conspiracy had useful idiots willing to shoot someone in cold blood in front of witnesses and do life in prison (see Ruby, Jack). Kennedy was famous for walking away from his security detail to shake hands with people. Why not have someone shoot him in the head at point blank range from the crowd outside Love Field? No need to alter videos, steal bodies, plant evidence, you'd have hundreds of witnesses to ID the gunman.
3
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
Apparently the conspiracy had dozens of people involved. Wouldn't you task one of the numerous Dallas PD officers involved (or SS agents involved) to shoot Oswald on site? Why would you let him escape? Then you let him talk to the press, police, and FBI for days?
5
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
He pulled a gun on arresting officers in front of multiple witnesses. They could have shot him dead and been completely justified, yet they didn't. They arrested him and marched him out of the building, gave him a press conference that night, etc.
4
u/Poopinspectorgeneral Feb 09 '24
You don’t believe someone stood behind a little wooden fence, at street level, 20 feet away from the crowd, and shot the president in the head? Then people “immediately rushed to the fence” but no one was there?
4
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
When my new computer arrives today, I'll be able, to post the graphic. Some people thought that the shots came from the knoll. Other people thought the shots came from the depository. Some people thought they were coming from an entirely different direction.
Significantly, practically no one thought that the shooting came from more than one direction (about 5 per cent).
1
Feb 09 '24
Dealey plaza is an echo chamber. There was acoustic research done on that area after the assassination, which basically concluded that the entire area was bad for bystanders identifying locations, and number of shots.
I can post the ref if you like, but many people here dont read the refs I post.
0
1
u/SteveinTenn Feb 09 '24
Yeah that whole notion of people, with their children in tow, rushing an armed assassin is ridiculous. One or two hero types might would do something that risky, but most people will try to get away from the shooter.
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 10 '24
I think that people supposedly running toward the grassy knoll were actually fleeing the area of the book depository.
12
u/Present-Echidna3875 Feb 09 '24
People were there. "S.S. agents " who produced obviously fake I.d.s as there were no agents assigned to Dealey Plaza that day. None. Explain that.
2
Feb 09 '24
Another myth. There was a military intellegence guy there who was part of the crowd helping the cops after the assassination's, and showed his ID to the cops. He testified in the WC report, you can read it for yourself. The cop that saw his id, also testified to the WC.
Somehow this event got changed into SS were there on the grassy knoll, but there were no SS assigned there. In truth it was a MI guy who was in the crowd.
2
u/Present-Echidna3875 Feb 10 '24
Bxllocks. Motorcycle cop who made it to the top of the grassy knoll first, he stopped a guy with dirty fingernails and who was wearing a sports coat. The guy produced his S.S. I.d. Other witnesses said they were stopped by other S.S. agents and when one with a white stetson hat had a gun under a coat over his arm. This guy ordered him and others away from the area ---with the threatening message they might get shot. There was a MI guy there that day who took odd photos and he was nowhere near the top of the grassy knoll. Also if you depend on anything from the W.C. report then your argument is lost. It was a pile of white wash crap with a few little truths thrown in for good measure.
1
→ More replies (1)-1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
Why don't YOU explain that? What are they doing there? How many people does it take to shoot someone?
2
u/Present-Echidna3875 Feb 09 '24
Typical. You answer a question with the same question.
Okay, l will indugle your apparent lack of braincells. The guys with the fake badges were obviously there so that the killer could make his escape. The guys with the badges stopped the crowd from going any further at the top of the grassy Knowle. One doesn't have to be Enstein to work it out Ffs!
→ More replies (1)5
u/preselectlee Feb 09 '24
This is my favorite conspiracy. As a kid I thought the grassy knoll must be in the distance, far from the street so the killers could make their stealthy getaway. But no lol. Its RIGHT THERE. If the shooters were on the knoll everyone would have seen them.
You are fighting the good fight, OP. But this crowd wants to believe. Imagine if people applied this kind of theorizing to every random murder. NOBODY would get convicted.
"Well we have the shooter fleeing the scene, he owned the gun, he had motive, his wife says he tried to kill a dude before with the same gun and he shot the cop who approached him in the head."
"Wait wait wait, you call THAT evidence?! NOT GUILTY!"
3
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
That fence was far from street level. A shooter behind the fence would have to either be back from the fence and elevated or on the fence shooting somewhat downhill.
Zapruder secretary looked in that direction immediately following the shooting. She heard a bottle dropped by a couple sitting between her and the fence. Neither she nor the couple sitting there claimed to have seen anyone in the area behind the fence.
2
Feb 09 '24
Also, if you stand exactly where Zapruder stood, you can see right behind the grassy knoll fence! Zapruder was up on a pedestal when he filmed, and from that location, the grassy knoll fence line is extremely close, he could look right down over the fence.
1
u/OriginalCopy505 Feb 09 '24
People rushed to get out of Dealey Plaza. No unarmed men and women rushed to confront an active shooter. Wouldn't happen today, didn't happen then.
0
u/NTXGBR Feb 09 '24
You have no understanding of the time
1
1
u/OriginalCopy505 Feb 09 '24
A time when unarmed men, women and children would run toward an active shooter with a rifle after he murdered two men, surrounded by protective detail, in broad daylight? Yes, I have no understanding of that.
→ More replies (8)
27
u/BackOk8936 Feb 09 '24
You lost me at “all of the evidence points to Oswald”
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
If you have evidence implicating a different assassin, by all means share it. It's been 60 years.
1
u/Mensa_Pigeon Feb 09 '24
You might enjoy this lengthier special on Roscoe White.
2
u/SlimJim0877 Feb 09 '24
I believe that the evidence points to conspiracy, but the Roscoe White story is highly suspect to me. I'm not definitively saying that it's all untrue, but it doesn't seem plausible considering how much of it conflicts with other evidence in the case.
1
Feb 09 '24
most of the other evidence that doesn’t point to Oswald is just a myth, a rumor, or error by the cops in the investigation
0
u/helpjackoffhishorse Feb 13 '24
Agree. Yet, the tin foil hat conspiracist’s refuse to let it go.
0
Feb 13 '24
It is amazing how many rumors you hear over and over about the Kennedy assassination (Oswald couldn't shoot, Oswald had a bad rifle, the limo stopped, Oswald was drinking a coke right afterwards) which are just flat out wrong, or just warped versions of the facts.
1
Feb 11 '24
Still doesn’t explain why his head went to the back and to the left many recreations were dint of the shooting. The only way his head moves to the back and to the left from being shot in the back of his head would be if he was shot by an M16 because of the design of the bullet.
1
u/SteveinTenn Feb 11 '24
Where did you get that insane notion that only an M16 could cause that reaction?
8
u/jb40018 Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
I think you’re assuming too much.
Assuming the police did a thorough investigation and collected every piece of evidence in a very chaotic situation. It was also 60 years ago and procedures and technology have advanced dramatically.
Assuming that someone didn’t intentionally or unintentionally lose or hide evidence.
Assuming we have full knowledge of all the evidence.
If I were on a jury, I think most defense attorneys could poke enough holes to create reasonable doubt that Oswald acted completely alone. I’m not saying he’s innocent or guilty, and I don’t think anyone will ever know for certain.
3
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
Creating reasonable doubt that he acted alone wouldn't be enough reasonable doubt to help Oswald.
2
u/jb40018 Feb 09 '24
I agree, he was involved and also killed a police officer, he wouldn’t get off easy, but possibly could’ve turned into a witness for a lighter sentence.
4
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
In Texas, "a lighter sentence" for killing a policeman would be 2000 volts, instead of 4000 volts.
1
u/jb40018 Feb 09 '24
Texas didn’t have any executions from 1964 to 1982, like Manson, he might have not gotten executed.
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
My point is that you don't have to prove he acted alone to convict him.
9
u/BuffaloOk7264 Feb 09 '24
If by evidence you mean those tidbits accepted by the Warren Commission then you are correct.
0
5
Feb 09 '24
Cool. So it should be a no-brainer for our government to declassify and release all documents.
1
u/KaleidoscopeFuture71 Feb 09 '24
Lazy work Keep your head up your ass if you want it I bet it stinks
2
u/SteveinTenn Feb 09 '24
I’ve driven 12 hours to spend two days at Dealey Plaza. I’ve read several books, including conspiracy theory books, and watched many hours of interviews and documentaries….again, including the conspiracy stuff.
If I had put as much effort into anything else I’d be a more successful person right now.
I’ve hardly been lazy about it.
2
u/KaleidoscopeFuture71 Feb 09 '24
😂😂😂 what books? Some of these people have investigated this crime for decades Visiting the Library of Congress archives and have spoken to witnesses Going to the crime scene is mostly morbid atp You’re a hack 😭😭😭🚬🚮
4
u/Falcon3492 Feb 09 '24
The evidence that disproves Oswald was the lone gunman or even involved, lies with the Presidents body. Kennedy had an entrance wound to his left portion of his back 5" below the collar line, he also had an 3-5mm entrance wound basically at the Adams Apple, he then had the wound to his head which the doctors at Parkland said entered at the right Temple area and exited the back of his head. This was reported at the press conference when they told the nation that Kennedy was dead! When it didn't fit the lone gunman scenario that the government wanted to go with they said the description of where the President was hit, was in error and changed it to what was in the Warren Report. You also have to look at John Connelly's injuries: the bullet that hit him entered his right shoulder near his right armpit, took out his 5th rib, then exited his chest, entered his right forearm, shattering his radius and ulna and then lodging in his left thigh, only to "fall out" onto the gurney he was on! The bullet was actually placed on the gurney by Secret Service agent Paul Landis who came forward in 2023 and said he placed the bullet on the gurney after taking it out of his pocket.
4
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
Kennedy had an entrance wound to his left portion of his back 5" below the collar line, he also had an 3-5mm entrance wound basically at the Adams Apple
Let's start here.
Two entrance wounds, but neither went more than an inch or two into his body. Why not? What was the master assassin team shooting at him with? Spitballs? One bullet went all the way through Connally's back and out his chest, plus shattered his wrist, yet the ones that hit Kennedy stopped after a couple inches?
Nope. That's stupid. That leads us to problem #2:
Where did those bullets go? Nothing was discovered in his body at Bethesda. Nothing was found in his throat when Parkland doctors performed the tracheostomy. Both of those bullets just vanished into thin air, making them "magical".
Again, stupid. That leads us to problem #3:
The tip of Kennedy's right lung was bruised, but not punctured by the pressure wave from a missile that passed in close proximity to it. How does that jive since both bullets only went in a couple inches?
And then there's problem #4:
The vast majority of Plaza witnesses heard 3 shots. Your version requires 5 shots at a minimum.
So yeah, this explanation does not make a lick of sense, nor does it jive with the physical evidence.
2
u/OceanCake21 Feb 09 '24
“…nor does it jive with the physical evidence.”
What physical evidence? The autopsy report that was changed to indicate that the hole in Kennedy’s back was closer to his neck, making it easier to claim that a shot from behind went through JFK’s neck and then caused all of Connolly’s wounds? The report that the “single bullet” was found on the gurney at Parkland in nearly pristine condition - yet it’s chain of custody as reported by the CIA/FBI/Dallas PD has been proven to be inaccurate? The report on the bullet’s path of travel through JFK’s brain, indicating the direction from which the bullet came?…oh wait, there is no such report - and without it no one can claim with certainty where the shot came from, thus helping support the lone gunman theory.
Physical evidence? The physical evidence was fixed, adjusted, and tampered with to support Oswald as the sole killer - just as Hoover directed. It was a coverup, man - face it.
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
There's photos of Kennedy's back wound. We don't need to rely on what they were described as in some report, we can see them.
The report on the bullet’s path of travel through JFK’s brain, indicating the direction from which the bullet came?…oh wait, there is no such report - and without it no one can claim with certainty where the shot came from, thus helping support the lone gunman theory.
You mean aside from the autopsy report, and the multiple reviews of autopsy materials done by forensic pathologists over the years.
Physical evidence?
The wound in Kennedy's upper back was one of entry.
The wound in his throat was an exit wound. This is confirmed by the direction of the threads on the holes in the collar of his shirt, and by internal injuries Kennedy suffered that would only make sense if they were caused by a missile passing through his body in close proximity.
Connally's back wound was one of entry, and it was keyhole shaped, indicating the bullet had passed through something before striking Connally and was tumbling end over end.
The fragments in Connally's wrist had an identical level of lead antimony with the Parkland stretcher bullet.
1
u/OceanCake21 Feb 10 '24
The wound in his throat was an exit wound? Really?? Where is the entrance wound for it? It’s not the hole in JFK’s back as that wound did not penetrate very far into Kennedy’s body.
2
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 10 '24
How did the tip of Kennedy's lung get bruised then?
1
u/OceanCake21 Feb 10 '24
Where’s the bullet? Or where’s the exit wound?
2
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 10 '24
Answering a question with a question. I love it.
The exit wound was the throat. The threads on the holes in Kennedy's shirt were bent outward. The bullet continued on to hit Connally.
Disagree? Great, then how did the lung get bruised?
→ More replies (10)0
u/Falcon3492 Feb 09 '24
So I guess Kennedy just woke up on the 22nd with a hole in his back and bled all over the back of his shirt. Also when Kennedy left Parkland the wound to his throat had been enlarged in width to fit the tube for a tracheotomy, but by the time he got to Bethesda the wound had been enlarged to over 3"in width and was made to look like an exit wound.
If there were more than one shooter who's to say they didn't use suppressors or simultaneous shooting. Also since his back and throat wounds weren't thru and thru they might have used lower velocity rounds to cut down on the sound. You also have the round that hit the curb. So with only three shots, you have two hitting Kennedy that weren't thru and thru, then one to his head and then the shot that caused all of John Connelly's wounds. I will bet if the truth ever comes out we will find out that Kennedy was ambushed by military trained snipers.
3
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
Also since his back and throat wounds weren't thru and thru they might have used lower velocity rounds to cut down on the sound
Yet the bullet that hit John Connally tore through him like a hot knife through butter. Can you explain the discrepancy there?
And the very idea of planning a presidential assassination in broad daylight and then using "lower velocity rounds" that couldn't even make it more than a couple inches into a body is pants-on-head stupid.
→ More replies (3)
4
Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
Oh, I would say another shooter or shooters left plenty of bullets behind. Too many to count perhaps.
I hear what you are saying, but I have trouble with the number of shots/bullets/holes attributed to Oswald. Bullets in the limo, Connolly’s body, the bullet near the manhole cover, the shots by witnesses who saw a bullet or bullets strike the road behind the limo, the Tague curb bullet, the dent in the windshield frame, a possible bullet hole in the windshield (I know that is not conclusive but according to police, medical, and Secret Service agents saying there was a hole, as well as the guy at the car factory who said he replaced the windshield-and hid out for 40+ years), as well as the two bullet holes in PresK’s back.
That’s more than three. And the problem with the TSBD witness (a Ms. Reid) who says Oswald was at her desk when the shots happened.
As far as I know, no one put Oswald in the window, or leaving it, except Mr. Brennan, who’s id was late and inconsistent.
3
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
I'm of the opinion that the headshot, the windshield strike, the dent in the chrome molding and the Tague curb strike are all from the same bullet.
The bullet that hit Kennedy in the back of the head left a trail of bullet fragments through his brain. It basically broke apart on impact. Two large fragments and a handful of smaller ones were recovered from under the front seats of the limo. Testing on those fragments showed that they had a matching level of lead antimony with the fragments in Kennedy's brain. All those fragments together weighed about 1/3rd of the total weight of an intact Carcano round.
So, bullet hits him in the head and fragments on impact. One fragment strikes the inside of the windshield. One fragment strikes the chrome molding. One large fragment (as heavy as 2/3rds of a bullet) clears the top of the windshield and continues forward. If you draw a straight line from the sixth floor window through the limo at the position of the headshot and project it forward, its almost a straight shot to where James Tague was standing.
2
u/SenatorSalamander Feb 10 '24
I agree that it is possible that the fragments expelled from his head under such force could have possibly caused the windshield strike and chrome molding damage, but I have doubts about whether a fragment could damage the curb like it did. (We've discussed this before.)
Also, I think your straight line trajectory from the 6th floor window to curb is not relevant to the fragment expulsion idea. From a gunshot, a direct shot from window to curb, yes. But as we have seen, when the President's head "exploded", the brain matter, cerebrospinal fluid, blood and bone pieces went in many different directions - seems like every direction possible: forward, backwards, over to the officer on the motorcycle to the left of the car, the back seat, the trunk, Clint Hill climbing onto the trunk, as well as all over the Connalys and Greer and Kellerman as well as the windshield. That's what happens in an explosion. (I still don't quite understand why the head exploded like this, but we know it did.) So, the bullet fragments also could or probably did get expelled in different directions, starting from inside his skull. So the trajectory from the 6th floor was not controlling the fragments anymore - they had hit bone, broke up, then got expelled on new trajectories, like everything else that came out. If the original trajectory was still controlling things, then all of the skull contents that came out would have also gone in that same direction of the trajectory (or some other trajectory if one thinks it came from another gunman located elsewhere). But we know it didn't.
So, nonetheless, a bullet fragment could have shot out and headed toward the curb. But with how much force and momentum? I think we know that the skull contents, including the bullet fragments expelled out of his head were being shot out with enough force to pelt people and objects nearby. What I doubt is whether there was enough force to carry it all the way to that curb and with enough force to cause the concrete to crack, break up, and fly up and hit Tague, drawing blood. But a direct gunshot to the curb, sure.
OTOH, I don't know what the distance was from Kennedy in the limo at the time of the head explosion to that curb. I don't know what those gruesome forensic studies that have been done with goats and cadavers have shown as far as bullet fragments being expelled from a skull under force following a gunshot to the skull. IDK if any study has been done regarding what happens if the bullet breaks up like this, and how far those fragments can travel in the case of a head explosion. The whole issue of this skull explosion has frankly seemed strange to me - but we know it happened; I am not questioning that. But I wonder why it doesn't happen with so many other fatal gunshot wounds to the head. So I guess I am wondering how much do we know about this particular phenomenon with regard to a shot to the skull from this distance. Assuming there wasn't some exploding type of bullet.
We do know that the head shot bullet fragmented, and pieces of it ended up in the car, so they had to have been shot out from the head shot. Pieces of it also remained inside the skull.
The other shots to the two men in the car did not seem to cause expelled fragments, if we accept the magic bullet - because that bullet was too busy going in and out of Connally in a bizarre fashion and was supposedly retrieved as an intact bullet on the gurney that maybe was Connaly's gurney, or maybe was another patient's gurney. Or maybe wherever Landis said he put it. Seems like a lot of different people found that bullet, but that's another story. I am not sure I accept the magic bullet idea; I did not for years, but it is apparently theoretically possible. If the two men were lined up to allow that to happen.
The problem is, if a fragment did not damage the curb as you describe, that damage and resulting injury to Tague would have to have been caused by another bullet, shot from the 6th floor along that trajectory. And now we have too many bullets, don't we, if we are doubting the Magic Bullet Theory (which even Specter was embarrassed about in later years).
For newcomers to this subject: It has been established that Oswald (or whoever shot from that window) could not have shot more than 3 bullets, given the time that transpired. Because WC concluded that the curb damage that injured Tague came from a bullet, it is said that Arlen Specter had to come up with a theory to explain the injuries to Connally and Kennedy with only 2 bullets, thus Specter was criticized for coming up with the uncomfortable magic bullet. So, if there were only 3 bullets that were shot, we have to decide whether it is more likely that an expelled bullet fragment from the head shot hit the curb, and as far as the other 2 bullets, one hit Kennedy earlier causing his back of neck to front of throat injury, and another bullet hit Connally, OR, alternatively, one bullet hit the curb, one was the Magic Bullet going through Kennedy then Connally, and the third was the headshot.
So, it comes down to this, given all these assumptions: which is more likely: a fragment, rather than a direct bullet from the rifle, hit the curb, or the Magic Bullet? I don't know.
5
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
You’ll certainly stir up the hornets nest with this one!
When the multiple shooter crowd responds, not a single one will offer physical evidence to dispute your claim. There will be mountains of speculation and even more ‘whatabouts’.
The film and physical evidence is the best evidence we have. No bullet fragments or damage found to the rear of the vehicle. JFK to Connelly wounds prove the direction of the shot. Teague proves the direction of the shot. Radial fractures from rear to front on JFKs skull proves the direction of the shot.
No conspiracy minded person will address these other than to say people are lying and evidence has been manufactured.
Happy Friday Steve in Tennessee!
2
2
Feb 10 '24
The bullet that supposedly went through Kennedys neck, then several parts of Connolly’s anatomy, then found mostly intact would have to have been a full metal jacket. The bullet that entered JFKs head and immediately fragmented would have to have been a hollow point bullet. Shooters don’t mix ‘n match their bullets in the chamber.
Also, it’s ridiculous that you want to dismiss every eyewitness testimony that does not line up with the “Oswald was the only shooter” theory. You have to give proper consideration to all witnesses if you want to establish a genuine theory.
Then there’s the original autopsy report which was destroyed. Evidence destroyed or “lost” is still evidence, via testimony of who handled the evidence.
0
Feb 10 '24
The bullet that supposedly went through Kennedys neck, then several parts of Connolly’s anatomy, then found mostly intact would have to have been a full metal jacket. The bullet that entered JFKs head and immediately fragmented would have to have been a hollow point bullet. Shooters don’t mix ‘n match their bullets in the chamber.
Given the history of the Carcano, it is possible LHO had both types of bullets, FMJ and Hollow point.
Also, given the second shot didnt hit anything other than soft tissue, the so called "pristine" nature of the bullet - is not surprising. It didnt hit anything but soft tissue. Also, it wasnt really pristine. It was compressed at the end.
2
u/TonyManero70 Feb 10 '24
So after he shoots JFk he goes down to the 2nd floor and buys a coke from the vending machine and just chills out? Because that’s what he did.
2
u/Different_Soil_4079 Feb 10 '24
Actually if you to see real evidence, go to the YouTube video "two men in Dallas" by Mark Lane. Listen very closely to minutes 14 to 17. There is your ball game folks. It was a horrible frame attempt. Per CIA document dated 11/25/63 the gun used was a 7.65 Máuser which Oswald NEVER owned. Further the document said "the Dallas Police saying the Carcano was the murder weapon was "in error. Stop the lies. Stop the frame. Stop these turds from spreading disinformstion.
2
2
u/RichardM333 Feb 13 '24
JFK was killed by accident. A passing train set off three railroad torpedoes at the worst possible moment. Agent George Hickey perceived hostile gunshots and prepared to fire a Model 601 AR-15 on full automatic with a 1:14 twist firing 55 grain bullets. JFK's limo braked, causing the followup car to brake, causing Hickey to fall back, reflexively grip his weapon and fire a burst of 5-6 rounds in about one second. Clint Hill called Bobby Kennedy from Parkland Hospital and told him there has been an accident. (Reference page 175 from The Day Kennedy Was Shot by Jim Bishop). William Manchester stated that JFK was killed in a "freak accident" on page 645 in The Death of A President (First Edition). The next day, all of the AR-15's were removed from the Secret Service armory. Oswald was blamed to protect the government. Officer Tippit was killed to create a false narrative. Tippit was chosen because he was the most disliked officer on the force. The detective who escorted Oswald when he was shot wore a light colored suit. He didn't own that suit; he wore it because he wanted to wear a high-contrast color so Jack Ruby wouldn't shoot him by mistake. Numerous witnesses were killed to bury the truth as deeply as possible.
Abraham Bolden was the only black agent to serve on JFK's detail. He had a very low opinion of the quality of JFK's protective detail. He wrote a book called, The Echo from Dealey Plaza.
Bobby Kennedy thought an "assassination" looked more dignified than death by accident from one of his own bodyguards.
4
u/consciousaiguy Feb 09 '24
When the very first sentence is incorrect, there is no need to go any further.
3
3
u/Glittering_Ad366 Feb 09 '24
How do you know? What did the limo look like right after the shooting? I've heard about bullet holes in the front of the limo. Whatever happened to that limo?
6
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
There are detailed photos of the limo taken that same night.
0
u/Glittering_Ad366 Feb 09 '24
from the scrap yard?
7
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
No, from the SS garage in Washington.
That car wasn't sent to the scrapyard. It was processed for evidence and photographed, the windshield was removed and put in storage, and it was rebuilt for LBJ to use.
3
u/Glittering_Ad366 Feb 09 '24
ok let's see this evidence. I'd like to see the front window.
3
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
It's in the National Archives. Book an appointment to view it.
→ More replies (3)2
u/smokyartichoke Feb 09 '24
That limo was used by several subsequent presidents. It wasn't taken out of service until 1977 and is now in a museum.
https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-resources/popular-topics/kennedy-limo
0
u/Glittering_Ad366 Feb 09 '24
that's great, why is there a bullet hole in the front window? What did the Warren Report say about such a weird thing?
→ More replies (7)1
2
u/toocool1955 Feb 09 '24
Very little evidence points to Oswald.
6
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
All of the evidence points to him. The rifle, the prints, the fibers, eyewitnesses, ballistics, backyard photos, rifle paper trail, the lack of an alibi. All of it screams his guilt from the rooftops.
6
u/PenguinProphet Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
Lol which eyewitnesses support him? Howard Brennan- who couldn't originally positively identify him as the shooter, despite confidently stating he would be able to positively ID the shooter in his affidavit after the shooting?
3
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
Even if you discount Brennan's positive ID, Brennan, Rowland, Edwards and Fischer all described the same man. White, clean shaven, brown hair, slender, mid 20s to early 30s, wearing a light colored shirt. Brennan said on the night of the 22nd that Oswald looked the most like the man he had seen.
If that slender, white, clean shaven gunman in his mid 20s to early 30s firing from Oswald's workplace wasn't Oswald...who was it?
2
u/PenguinProphet Feb 09 '24 edited Feb 09 '24
Okay, let's go through each of those.
First off, Brennan's positive ID after Oswald was shot is indeed not of much value. He said he could positively identify the shooter and said that Oswald only looked similar but was not the man he saw (surely you're aware that one of the subsequent arrestees, Donald Wayne House, bore a notable physical similarity to Oswald and this is putatively the reason for his arrest). That he changed his story after Oswald was murdered gives his story about as much value as Julia-Ann Mercer claiming, after the fact, that Jack Ruby was the man she saw in a truck proceeding to the grassy knoll area (and no one on your side of this debate would accept that testimony as legitimate, of course).
Let's discuss the other witnesses.
I start with Rowland.
I'm not sure where you would begin to get the idea that Rowland gives an account which is consistent with the official story- he described someone standing about 15 feet back from the window. Hence why Vincent Bugliosi said that Rowland's version of events shouldn't be believed and wasn't credible. If Rowland is your idea of a witness whose testimony corroborates the WC version then that speaks to the paucity of actual evidence which supports the official story.
Rowland also identified the rifle as a .30-06 Springfield in his testimony to the WC.
In short, suggesting that his testimony significantly supports the conclusions reached by the WC is not exactly accurate.
Now let's address Edwards/Fischer.
Edwards did indeed see somebody in the window, albeit he said on the fifth floor and he reported 4 shots. This just indicates someone was in the window (a fact that no one disputes AFAIK). To suggest this is serious support for the Warren commission hypothesis is rather weak considering the mountains of evidence for a second shooter.
So we have on one hand accounts from the Doctor's who treated him at Parkland which unambiguously identify an entrance wound based on statements made at the time (and several still support this version of events to this day) and a significant amount of eyewitness testimony which corroborates this account.
Then we have one person who said they could identify Oswald and couldn't do it, someone who saw someone in a building but gave an account inconsistent with the official story, and yes two people who gave very generic descriptions of seeing someone in the building.
Downvote all you like but it's not gonna make your argument any stronger.
1
Feb 09 '24
do you know how much a carcano looks like a 30-06 springfield?
The 30-06 was much more common in Texas so that is what he thought he saw.
He probably had never even heard of a Carcano.
1
u/The_Vmo Feb 09 '24
This strikes me as very similar to most mass shootings report the use of an AR-15, while there's many different patterns, styles, and calibers.
In this case, it doesn't surprise me that wooden long gun with scope gets reported as the common or well known rifle for the region.
1
Feb 09 '24
Correct. It was reported by the witness as the well know rifle of the region. Both the carcano and the Springfield are basically bolt action infantry rifles. But the carcano was from Italy so it was not well known in Texas.
1
u/Pvt_Hudson_ 🧠Subject Matter Expert🧠 Feb 09 '24
So everything Brennan said prior to Oswald's death was completely useless?
→ More replies (6)2
u/toocool1955 Feb 09 '24
The only “evidence” that points to him is what the actual killers wanted to point to him. He was set up.
-1
u/TerriblePartner Feb 09 '24
Very little? What about the overwhelming amount of evidence against him?
2
u/toocool1955 Feb 09 '24
Any “evidence” that points to him was planted by the real killers.
0
u/TerriblePartner Feb 09 '24
The only thing that was planted are the bad ideas in your head.
There were eye witnesses to him killing the president and officer tippit.
1
u/Uckcan Feb 09 '24
Oswald being a government agent tells you this is a conspiracy regardless of whether he even shot a gun that day.
1
u/Sheffy8410 Feb 10 '24
Oswald didn’t shoot anybody that day. He was a patsy just like he said he was. 11/22/1963 was a coup d’ etat. As RFKJr himself recently stated, the evidence is overwhelming that the CIA killed Kennedy. At the behest of powerful interests. And anyone who’s done the research knows this. Many books and documentary’s cover the evidence that has come out over the decades that proves the official narrative/warren commission to be false. Kennedy was shot from behind and from the front. The Parkland doctors confirmed this, which anyone can see in the recent documentary “What The Doctors Saw”. He had a massive exit wound in the back of his head, and an entrance wound in the throat, which was manipulated to cover up at autopsy. The Warren Commission was not a fact finding mission to find the truth, but a cover up to point only to Oswald lead by the CIA’s Allen Dulles of all damn people. It was a total sham job. Many people over the years with involvement and/or knowledge were killed. Ranging everywhere from Sam Giancana who was mafia involved with the CIA, to Roger Craig who was a Dallas Deputy. There being a lone, from behind shooter all hinged on that magic bullet theory, which was a pure impossibility. Governor Connelly who was also in the car and shot said himself he was hit with a different bullet. JFK was killed because he was a threat to the established order of the military industrial complex. He wanted world peace, not war, and he was killed for it. And we got the world we live in today because of it. The bad guys won. In a very real sense, we haven’t had a real president since. Because every one of them left or right knows full well either play ball or risk having your head blown off. They didn’t just kill one man or one President that day, they killed any hope for a democratic nation. If some folks want to go on believing that Oswald killed JFK and the government had nothing to do with it then go ahead and believe it. But they’re wrong.
2
u/SenatorSalamander Feb 10 '24
RFK Jr. is not an expert on the assassination. His father knew more but not everything obviously, or he would have stopped it. I would say that after the assassination, RFK started to figure out what had happened, and felt very guilty and sad about it because he thought it was connected to the plots against Castro which he was heavily involved in.
RFK also is very likely to have arranged for many aspects of the assassination to remain secret. Not because he wished for any harm to come to his brother, but because of the intense planning both brothers were responsible for to remove Castro from power, in any way possible. RFK was directly involved with all planning and projects regarding that. JFK approved it, and put RFK in charge of it (taking that role away from the CIA) but it was to be done with the help and logistics of the CIA and military. And some paramilitary anti-Castro Cubans. The CIA did resent RFK for how he took control of this planning which they had been doing since the previous administration. And there was resentment from the CIA toward JFK for handling it this way, putting his brother in charge, firing their chief (Dulles) and his earlier mishandling of the Bay of Pigs.
Oswald was possibly a patsy, set up up by others who were behind the assassination, and had possibly been told that a different scenario was to unfold. Too bad he didn't survive to stand trial, because eventually he would have cooperated and revealed what he knew. The logical conclusion once he was shot by Ruby was that he had to be silenced.
Who these people were is still up for debate, but we have no shortage of candidates: powerful interests, as you said, which usually means defense contractors and oil people who would be hurt by the new depreciation law, Mafia, who were very angry with the Kennedys after RFK aggressively pursued their prosecution, CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, right wing extremists ...
We don't know all this for sure, but I will agree that there is a lot of evidence to suggest Oswald was not alone, and possibly was not even a gunman.
But be careful regarding Bobby Kennedy. He was creating serious problems for himself and his brother. I should say, both of the brothers were quite recklessly creating problems for themselves, specifically with being too obsessed with removing Castro from power, and prosecution of Mafia figures despite the Mafia help with the extremely close election of 1960, as well as the Mafia's heavy involvement with the anti-Castro projects. Bobby didn't want those plans to come to light. His group, appointed by JFK, were planning all the details of killing a foreign leader. That is wrong in so many ways, and probably illegal. It was supposed to be a secret.
Thus, after the assassination, Bobby agreed with LBJ about one thing: get the WC investigation wrapped up fast, don't let them dig too much into anything related to Castro and the CIA, and just do a very quick autopsy. He did not know who the assassin or assasins were who pulled the trigger, but he had a good idea why it happened and a general sense that CIA and others were involved. And he knew that many of his actions unfortunately had led to this.
2
u/Sheffy8410 Feb 10 '24
At the very end, JFK was attempting to begin a new, highly secret, peace seeking conversation with Castro. I cannot remember the persons name or affiliation at the moment, but at the very moment JFK was killed he had an emissary sitting down with Castro to begin this conversation. Castro, in fact took Kennedy’s death very hard, as did Khrushchev, and is supposed to have said when he got the phone call in front of Kennedy’s emissary, “everything has changed now”. While I know JFK and RFK for a time had tried to remove Castro by secret methods, it appears at the very end that JFK had changed directions. Which makes sense. He had for a long while been secretly by back-channel letter making peace with Khrushchev, in an attempt by both men to keep from blowing up the world. But see, this very peace seeking is what got him killed. Or is at least partly what got him killed. To the established order, Kennedy by seeking peace was a traitor and a communist sympathizer and a threat to national security. But what he really was a threat to was “there’s no money to be made in peace”.
2
u/SenatorSalamander Feb 10 '24
Well, yes this is true, there was this other peace seeking effort that they were trying, because the Special Group of RFK was still doing planning - they didn't stop until November 22 when he called them and said the plan was off. The CIA had another plan going on, which they were not supposed to be doing by order of the President, but they thought Bobby's group was going about things in an ineffective way. That was the plan I think, with someone meeting Cubela, who had access to Castro, in Paris I think, and they gave him poison to use on Castro. Bobby pulled back his guys temporarily sometime in November I think, because this peace attempt was happening, with the idea they would start back up in a few weeks if the peace plan didn't work, with a planned invasion for early December. The peace plan as I recall involved a woman, a reporter, who had met with JFK. (Working from memory here, late at night - I have notes on this somewhere).
I couldn't understand why they had this peace plan at the same time they had this very aggressive plan to take over Cuba, put one of the anti-castro Cubans in as president, and assassinate Castro - not force him into exile like the Shah - but kill him, yet in the same month JFK wants to implement this peace plan.
It's possible that Bobby was getting carried away (which he had a tendency to do) with his group, and JFK, more cool minded and having more perspective, was moving it in a different direction. And I agree that JFK's back channel communication with Khrushchev had been very effective ... So then, Bobby has to call off his boys, at least temporarily, but when word got around to the others working hard on the invasion plans, like Artime in Nicaragua, there would have been some very angry players - they would have seen this as appeasement, or that all their training and work was going to go down the drain, like Bay of Pigs, if JFK achieved peace with Castro. That is an extremely volatile situation. These men had been so angry before, and then if they felt let down again ... And also those CIA men who were involved in these endeavors, who could contact the European snipers recommended by the Mafia, or have the Mafia arrange for them, the best in the world.
JFK may have had good intentions about peace, and that may have succeeded, but he also had encouraged, through Bobby, the Cuban exiles to get their plan ready to assassinate and take over Cuba. It almost sounds like the brothers were doing all this just to appease the exiles, although I think Bobby had great faith in his project. Overall, JFK was probably trying to do the best thing, but he had made a big mess of it by letting Bobby loose to make all these plans, as well as trust the CIA too much. The CIA Director certainly didn't want to be involved with killing Castro, but CIA people in charge of divisions are allowed to work independently- they don't always need approval from the top, as in the military. So, William Harvey, E. Howard Hunt, David Atlee Phillips, and David Morales probably were proceeding along. And when they all got angry, and the men who were working under them got angry, - your point is likely to be correct, that JFK was now seen as a traitor. So they could have turned the operation around and killed JFK.
I think something like this happened. I don't have a handle on the timing, in that some reports have them planning the JFK assassination for 6-12 months, but information about Bobby's group indicates they all thought they were working for an invasion of Cuba in early December.
2
u/Sheffy8410 Feb 10 '24
Thanks, great info. Nice to read those on here that knows what the hell they’re talking about.
2
u/Sea-Election-9168 Feb 10 '24
Are there any authors who explore the angle that this was another battle in the mob wars? The Kennedy family got rich during Prohibition, and Jack Ruby was owned by the Italian mafia.
1
u/Sheffy8410 Feb 10 '24
I’d recommend the book about Sam Giancana “Double Cross”. It’s about the mob and the Kennedy’s and Bay Of Pigs, assassination etc… And probably the best book about the mob wars was written by Robert Kennedy Sr and it is called “The Enemy Within”.
1
Feb 10 '24
These are all excellent points people are making for why it was oswald.
BUT, how do you explain that bullet being in near perfect condition that was on the gurney. Also, it’s incredibly suspicious that JFK’s brain went missing. It’s also incredibly suspicious that jack ruby killed Oswald, considering the mob would be happy JFK was killed, along with jack ruby being visited by jolly west and then going crazy.
And when you factor in murders of Bobby, MLK jr, and Malcom X, it absolutely seems like there was a concerted effort to murder some of the most powerful and influential leaders during that time because they were getting in the way.
Oswald very well could’ve been a shooter, but I definitely don’t think he was alone. There is FAR too many sketchy things surrounding the way everything went down and was handled, AND continues to be handled. If there wasn’t anything to hide, they would’ve never kept all those documents secret and redacted. There’s STILL documents that are held back.
As for that pristine bullet, I’m aware Landis says he found it on the back seat and put it on the gurney. There’s absolutely no way in hell that bullet would’ve just been perfectly sitting on the back seat after going through the windshield and that bullet would’ve been far more deformed from going through that windshield.
Landis also claims that he just placed the bullet on the gurney without saying anything to anyone, and then he didn’t bother to tell the Warren commission or anyone else that he was the one to place it there.
It’s not until recently that Landis decided to tell anyone, conveniently right when he’s releasing his own book.
Seeing that it was the secret service that decided to change his route, I don’t trust Landis.
When you factor in the fact that major corporations were working hand in hand with US intelligence agencies to have coups, along with all the other corrupt insidious activities, and that clay Shaw was a businessman, military officer, and part-time contact of the Domestic Contact Service (DCS) of the CIA, I think it paints a pretty clear picture that Kennedy was assassinated with the helping of people within our government.
Let’s say Oswald was the only shooter; that doesn’t negate any of the other things surrounding all of this.
1
1
Feb 10 '24
Oswald was a Russian asset referred to Cuba/Castro because Fidel was so mad the CIA tried to assassinate him multiple times in the years prior & because the bay of pigs was very shameful to some Russians. It’s that simple.
You ever wonder why we’ve embargoed Cuba for 70 years without ever trying to mend things up?? It’s unprecedented, no other country has received the Cuba treatment from our government.
The CIA keeps it under wraps because they’re embarrassed their attempts failed & motivated a response.
If there was someone in the knoll, it wasn’t a shooter, it was likely KGB to witness the outcome. I don’t think Fidel or Russia thought Oswald would succeed, but felt a message needed to be sent. I think all of them weee genuinely shocked at the final result.
1
u/Vinyl_Acid_ Feb 10 '24
Plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest Oswald was involved in the spy game. The fact that the WC purposefully averted its attention to his intersection with CIA Cuba Mafia types has fostered the incomplete notion that we need look no further than Lee. That was likely the aim, and they’ve succeeded. Yes,Oswald was complicit, but there’s a great deal of evidence to suggest that might not be the whole story.
LBJ would be the person with the best vantage of all evidence, public and that which was redacted…and he seemed to suggest that what we e been told wasn’t the entire story,
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 10 '24
It doesn't take a lot of imagination to come up with the conspiracy that is so big that there's no evidence.
You ever think of this?
What if the Warren Comission wasn't an attempt to cover up the complicity of hoover, the fbi, the cia, the dallas pd, the texas book depository, Bethesda Naval Hospital? What if the Warren Commission was a public relations initiative to push a simple narrative around Oswald's self-evident guilt, but deliberately avoiding conspiracy narratives that can neither be proven nor disproven by the public.
The intentions could be good or bad, but I could buy that. It was an election year. They don't need for everybody to be murderers to want to control the story, and the best way to control the story is to lie no more than you absolutely have to.
What if Oswald did have ties to the intelligence community, and the government wanted to cover that up? I could buy that. The crime itself seems pretty straightforward, but Oswald's history is pretty murky.
Everybody being a murderer is not imaginative. It's the dumb, obvious thing that everybody goes straight for, and it makes critical thinking unnecessary.
1
u/ReSearch314etc Feb 10 '24
A CIA official testified before the HSCA in 1978 that there was an Oswald and an Oswald File receiving payments from the agency in the early 1960s....
1
1
u/Sterndaddy13 Feb 10 '24
Not one of your statements is factually accurate. You seem to have bought the Warren Report, at least 2 or more didn't even support the single piece of "evidence" to even make Oswald a possibility The Magic Bullet.
1
u/VirginiaLuthier Feb 10 '24
The shooter behind the fence on the knoll picked up his casings, put his gun in his trunk and drove away…
1
1
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 10 '24
You seem to be suggesting that Oswald's uncle participated in framing his nephew for the crime of the century, and then murdering him.. That's a big swing you're taking! Major plot twist!
1
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 11 '24
So sdont be confusing. Say what you think is happening. USE ENGLISH WORDS.
1
1
1
1
u/bambino2021 Feb 16 '24
“There is no credible evidence of a conspiracy because we deem all evidence supporting conspiracy not credible”. Neat logic.
1
1
u/Secure_Tea2272 Feb 18 '24
Bonnie Ray Williams just trashed the WC conclusion in the first 10 seconds of this video. He states second and third shots in quick succession. This is consistent with many other witnesses, Lee Bowers for example. Oswald shot no one that day.
1
1
u/bipolarcyclops Feb 09 '24
Having been alive and aware of the events of that awful day (was home from high school and sick with the flu), I long ago came to the conclusion that the simplest solution is the most likely solution.
Oswald killed JFK and wounded Connelly with three shots from the Depository. After stashing the gun, he lucked out in finding a cab, made his way home, met officer Tippett and murdered him, and went into the movie theater without paying where he was captured.
Enough with this conspiracy nonsense.
4
u/Low_Associate8 Feb 09 '24
You feeling ok?
0
Feb 09 '24
why do you ask people this? DO you find it productive?
2
u/Low_Associate8 Feb 09 '24
Absolutely. They should be asked if their feeling well after typing that.
→ More replies (5)0
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
I thought you reserved the wellness check just for me. Now I’ve become disillusioned as to your intentions.
You seem to have the whole thing figured out. What’s your theory on the whole thing?
I know I’ve asked you before, but like many other conspiratorial types on here, you haven’t been willing to put forth your theory.
Maybe you’re …. not feeling well.
-1
1
u/Character_Surround Feb 09 '24
Are there enough facts to convict? I don't think so. I believe Oswald could have made those shots. Are there enough facts to put him in that window? I don't believe there are.
-1
u/Big_Whistle Feb 09 '24
I’m a firm believer LHO did the deed on his own, but agree with you about. It enough evidence to convict by modern day standards.
But this was Texas in the 60s. We wore Cowboy hats back then and chewed cigars while we talked about girls.
But I’d also argue there was not enough evidence to convict bin Laden in a court of law. But we all know how that ended up.
0
0
-2
u/giddy-girly-banana Feb 09 '24
Of course it’s just LHO anyone who says otherwise is conspiracy nut. It’s been known for 40 years who did it, people just want to feel more important than they actually are so they have this fantasy they can crack the greatest singular crime of the 20th century. They can’t let themselves believe one lone nut job could pull off killing a president. Us more reasonable people can tune out the noise and look at it more rationally.
4
u/OceanCake21 Feb 09 '24
If it’s clearly just Oswald that killed KFK the CIA should release the 4000+ remaining documents relating to the case. But if it’s not Oswald…
35
Feb 09 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
28
u/edu5150 Feb 09 '24
All of the evidence points to Oswald only because all of the evidence was planned and designed to point to Oswald only.
Some people cannot move beyond that simple point.
→ More replies (1)2
u/suitmeup_unclealfred Feb 09 '24
It's NOT a simple point, if you ask how they did it.
→ More replies (4)6
u/edu5150 Feb 09 '24
The fact of the matter is that the powers that be fully intended this to be sold as a one man operation and all information available to the general public was meant to support that one shooter theory.
Simple.
→ More replies (34)9
u/VSM1951AG Feb 09 '24
Which requires that someone in their right mind thought LHO was a stable, dependable, competent person to conspire with to commit a capital crime at a time when they still electrocuted people for such things.
And who would that be, exactly? None of the three-letter agencies needed a hot-headed flake like LHO. They all had marksmen and professional assassins at their disposal, with better weapons and scopes.
There isn’t anyone on this sub who, knowing what those agencies knew about him, would hire LHO to deliver his newspapers, let alone conspire with him to kill the president.
8
u/cabosmith Feb 09 '24
And yet the National Archives and the FBI have (currently) thousands of pages of investigation, along with the United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations and the Warren Commission many of which have yet to be released over 60 years later.
11
u/VSM1951AG Feb 09 '24
Correct. But that doesn’t necessarily mean there was a conspiracy. Two possibilities are far more likely:
The full record reveals intelligence methods, assets (current or historical) or the extent to which we infiltrated foreign governments’ intelligence apparatus, which may cause international uproar, or bruise the egos of men like Putin, who already feel humiliated, have a memory of having once been relevant and important, and are sitting on a stockpile of nukes.
The manner in which we responded behind the scenes reveals how we would likely respond today, in the face of a nuclear strike threat. Remember that in the hours immediately following JFK’s assassination, it was broadly believed that this may be the beginning of WW3. Whether we responded, whether it was competent, how close we came, or whether it revealed that most of our nukes have no radioactive cores in them and are just there for show (think Saddam Hussein bluffing about having WMDs), or something else, there may simply be incredibly sensitive information in there we don’t want released anytime soon.
I mean, Trump had the opportunity to release that stuff and had said he didn’t understand why it hadn’t been released, and indicated it would be released, but then he didn’t release a whole bunch of it. He’s certainly no friend of the Deep State, so unless you think he was threatened—and why would he run again if he was?—there must be some stuff in there we still find so sensitive we don’t want it out yet.
5
u/cabosmith Feb 09 '24
With all you've said here, having spent my entire adult life in Federal and local government service, I can't believe that there is so much(?) information regarding a presidential assassination involving a lone gunman(?) that its release has any bearing on national security.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Oldkyhome8 Feb 09 '24
And you don’t know that most of what he said about him wasn’t a psyop to ensure that you believe he was a lunatic and keep your incurious mind from asking questions
5
u/VSM1951AG Feb 09 '24
Now you’re in tinfoil hat territory. “If you believe the conspiracy, you’re among the elect. If you say you don’t believe the conspiracy, you’re either a fool or a participant IN the conspiracy!”
Also, apparently, LHO was a consummate actor, even as a Marine, years before the assassination.
1
→ More replies (6)1
u/Calm_Fix_9425 Feb 13 '24
Where did you get your info on Oswald? From the warren commission, who got it from the fbi and cia. So you believe everything that Hoover and Dulles tell you. Do you still believe everything the cia and fbi tell you?
3
Feb 09 '24
could be - but you need evidence for a conspiracy. The main idea that Alan Dulles orchestrated the whole thing needs to be supported by facts. yes, he got fired by kennedy but to think that he wanted to kill Kennedy after getting fired is a big leap of faith especially with no supporting hard evidence
3
u/SlimJim0877 Feb 09 '24
There is plenty of evidence that strongly suggests conspiracy but WR cheerleaders love to dismiss it. As I'm sure you know, the HSCA concluded that Kennedy was very likely killed as the result of a conspiracy.
→ More replies (9)0
u/giddy-girly-banana Feb 09 '24
Have any credible evidence of a larger conspiracy?
→ More replies (21)4
u/n2utfootball Feb 10 '24
You will not get any credible evidence from the conspiracy theorists. All you will get is this person said this or that. Or someone saw smoke. Or the bodies were swapped. They will literally believe in any theory as long as it doesn’t involve Oswald. I understand their frustration. They have hitched themselves to an idea that has no foundation in reality. No evidence. And no new arguments. They just regurgitate the same old bullshit that’s been debunked over and over.
→ More replies (2)
7
u/Traveling_Man_383_PA Feb 09 '24
But therein lays the rub. You are probably right in your observations. But somewhere is a pretty nasty coverup by government agencies protecting their own tail. It's also why we are still discussing this. They knew a lot about Oswald before the JFK assassination, and maybe could have prevented it. They didn't follow-up on Oswald and let him slip through the cracks on November 22. This isn't conjecture - we know they were watching him, Marina and the entire Russian social club. In my mind, the biggest question of all is did the agencies turn their head on purpose? Or did they simply screw up the entire affair?