All Forums | General Discussion

JFK Assassination

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2543
Posts: 49
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2008
Posts: 1427
Posted: #26

I have read and seen quite a few theories on the shooting.

Reelz channel recently had a docudrama called JFK : The Smoking Gun.  It gave me more info on a different theory.

A book printed over 20 years ago -Mortal Error - poses the theory Oswald fired 2 shots at JFK - the first hit the pavement and bits of the bullet initially hit JFK.  The 2nd shot from Oswald hit JFK in the neck and hit the governor of Texas in the pres. limo.  Now the book poses the 3rd shot that hit JFK was shot directly behind him from a gun ( AR-15 ) that was accidentally fired by Secret Service agent Hickey  ( this is info based on ballistics / weapon ammo / and trajectory )   So an Australian detective recently wrote a book called Smoking Gun and basically helped make this docudrama - he poured over all this extra info/material/interviews / etc. that was released by the AARB - an assassination review board in the mid 90's.  He realized the Secret Service went to all these lengths to cover up the shooting  - by interfering at the autopsy, taking evidence / etc.

Anyway - the best theory I have read / heard of - and that is based on science and straight up detective work..

 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by tlml1899:



He's one of those people that believe if the government says it, it must be true. Sheep is what most call them

Yup you got me.  
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #28
And actually, I think Bugliosi and Posner have done the most exhaustive research on this subject.  And last time I checked, they were not government employees.  I would bet my house you never read their books because you already made up your mind. 

I do love the old, "there is no way Oswald could have made those shots."  So someone in a grassy Nile is going to pull out a rifle and do the same without anyone seeing them?

So funny how people will dismiss an unlikely event in favor of another very unlikely event just because.  
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #29
And JFK's head went 3 inches forward upon impact before going backward 8 inches. This is fact. Look up the London trial. Explain how this happens if he was shot from the front. 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 32143
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:

And JFK's head went 3 inches forward upon impact before going backward 8 inches. This is fact. Look up the London trial. Explain how this happens if he was shot from the front. 



How do you know JFK was not flinching forward three inches in agony just before the fatal head shot?

The back quarter of his head was blown out.  Had to be an exit wound.

A shot from the rear moved his head backward eight inches and blew the back of his head off on entrance??? 

C'mon Hutch.  You're a gun owner.  You know better.
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2006
Posts: 4298
Posted: #31
90 seconds after the last shot was firedon the motorcade a police officer ran into the schoolbook depository and was met at the entrance by the manager of the sbd.The first person the officer saw was Oswald standing at a Coke machine outside the lunchroom.Who's That he said,manager said He's OK he works here.There is no elevator at sbd so that means LHO changed history with accuracy ran length of 6th floor,ran down 6 flights of stairs, ran to the front of sbd,and decided to have a coke in less then 90sec. Oswald wasn't even on the 6th floor when the shots were fired.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 29027
Posted: #32
We'll never know the 100% truth and it was 50 years ago.  Time to move on?  Our Government has lied to us so many times.  "19 Islamic radical terrorists came to this country armed with box cutters and defeated out multi-billion dollar air defense system, all while taking orders from a bearded guy in a cave in Afghanistan."  I guess that makes sense too, right?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2011
Posts: 6196
Posted: #33
Goodluck convincing me the final shot was not from the front, or the famous 'grassy knoll'

I understand that when you have a headshot and the head is pushed back it doesn't 100% mean the shot came from the front. 

However when I see the footage and hear the testimony from the people who were on the grassy knoll, I believe that there was more than 1 shooter.

Also if Oswald wanted to go down in infamy as the one who killed Kennedy, why deny it? Why call yourself a patsy?
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 71023
Posted: #34

Agree Goose, any round to the body or head will produce unpredictable movement. It's not like the movies.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2007
Posts: 18777
Posted: #35
When nerves get hit in the brain not just the head but body can make all kinds of unpredictable movements.  At times you'll see the arm or arms flail upward on a fatal head shot. 

Read post 31 again Hutch. 


 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 71023
Posted: #36

Quote Originally Posted by konabuzz:


Even if residue was found how would you know it was from the rifle or from the pistol used by Jack Ruby?  I'm sure there residue would be left after being shot at point blank.

kona i meant residue on Oswalt's hand and/forearm from the rifle.He only fired one gun so it's been said.

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 929
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by sindy:

It's an open and shut case.  Oswalt did it.  He had a military background.  His wife was shocked to see that when the house was searched his gun was missing from the usual spot it is always in.

He was described as a loner, mentally unstable and angry at times, and somebody who didn't accomplish much in life so clearly he wanted to go down in history and he did.

Jack Ruby simply loved JFK, everybody who knew Jack Ruby knew this, he was angry that Oswalt killed him so he shot him.

I guess conspiracy theories are more fun to talk about or fantasize about especially when it comes to such a great president but fact of the matter is the showboating president got done in by some nobody loser. 

I guess this was too much for the public to accept so they came up with one wild conspiracy theory after another, especially the uneducated ones...

As for why this and why that questions hinting there was more to it...while you can come up with questions like that for anything.  9/11 for example, one theory after another but the most reasonable and factual explanation is what it is.

Not saying you shouldn't question anything and everything but in JFK's case, it was Oswalt on his own.

The only one conspiracy was that JFK was hated by southerners/hicks and conservatives/hicks and much of the secret service was made up of them.  Some of the were allegedly proclaiming to friends that noway they would ever take a bullet for JFK and a few even went as far to say that if shots were ever fired they wouldn't save him...


Why has there not been an assassination attempt on president Obama? Seems like there is a lot of hate for him as well from vafious groups and also from people who stand to lose a lot with him being president
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 71023
Posted: #38

Oswalt's 6.5 mm 91/38 Carcano rifle, with scope.

Minimal recoil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4c5Zr7hzzA

Hits galore.

 

 

 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:




How do you know JFK was not flinching forward three inches in agony just before the fatal head shot?

The back quarter of his head was blown out.  Had to be an exit wound.

A shot from the rear moved his head backward eight inches and blew the back of his head off on entrance??? 

C'mon Hutch.  You're a gun owner.  You know better.

A jury who saw the Zapruder film frame by frame does not agree with you. 

And I am a gun owner, but I am not an expert as to how a human head reacts to being shot. 

And how do you know his head was flinching forward in agony?  

A person shot him from the front with a rifle.   What credible evidence is there to support that?

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2011
Posts: 6196
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by sindy:

As I said before, open and shut case, Oswalt acted alone and the proof was there but I guess for degenerates on gambling sites with nothing better to do it makes for ''good  conversation'' talking about all the popular and cliché conspiracy theories that have been kept alive...Get a life losers.

Some stupid dead president who was a borderline fairy shot dead like a chicken decades ago...who cares.


Yeah. We are the only ones in the world who believe in a conspiracy.

Thank you for putting it to rest as you were either there, or Oswald himself.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 1590
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:


A jury who saw the Zapruder film frame by frame does not agree with you. 

And I am a gun owner, but I am not an expert as to how a human head reacts to being shot. 

And how do you know his head was flinching forward in agony?  

A person shot him from the front with a rifle.   What credible evidence is there to support that?



A jury, that's your evidence? You're even dumber than I thought. The same type of jury that let OJ and Casey Anthony off...............that's your smoking gun?

You'll believe that over physics? The impact explosion was on the FRONT. His head AND his body jerked backward after the shot.

You'll all excited about 3 inches, but completely neglect that his whole body jerked backward which is beyond  the realm of physics if he was shot from the back.

Do yourself a favor , tell someone that majored in physics about your "jury" theory....and be prepared to get laughed at
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2005
Posts: 12241
Posted: #42
Once you realize that Jack Ruby was basically just some nut (and it's pretty clear he was basically just some nut), some of the more interesting conspiracy stuff gets less interesting.  That said, there are still some things that are awfully hard to come to terms with - like the parade route itself (I think the average 6th-grader would have said "bad idea"), and the eyewitness accounts of people who seemingly have no moitvation to lie, and who don't appear to have any connection to one another, w/r/t the presense of men in the kill zone, on the ground.  I wish Oliver Stone woulf make another movie, but this time just stick to the facts.  JFK is great, except it's about as fact-based as Shrek II. 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 6368
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:


In the London trial, Bugliosi proved (using the Zapruder film) that JFK's head actually moved a couple of inches forward at impact and then 8 inches backward after that.  But you have to watch it frame by frame to see it.  Now you still might believe someone shot him from the front, but these are the facts.  




not the facts. Just a different (and erroneous) 
Interpretation of the evidence.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 2206
Posted: #44
I was watching a show and they were talking to ex marine who is a sharpshooter and he said that no way was there just one person shooting. 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by tlml1899:



A jury, that's your evidence? You're even dumber than I thought. The same type of jury that let OJ and Casey Anthony off...............that's your smoking gun?

You'll believe that over physics? The impact explosion was on the FRONT. His head AND his body jerked backward after the shot.

You'll all excited about 3 inches, but completely neglect that his whole body jerked backward which is beyond  the realm of physics if he was shot from the back.

Do yourself a favor , tell someone that majored in physics about your "jury" theory....and be prepared to get laughed at

Yeah, Bugliosi is an idiot.  

It's fact...his head moved 3 inches forward at impact.  How do you explain that with a frontal shot?

And the backward movement has been explained as a neurological reaction.  

Why did his head move 3 inches forward at impact?  This is a fact...explain it.  
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by MaineRoad:

Once you realize that Jack Ruby was basically just some nut (and it's pretty clear he was basically just some nut), some of the more interesting conspiracy stuff gets less interesting.  That said, there are still some things that are awfully hard to come to terms with - like the parade route itself (I think the average 6th-grader would have said "bad idea"), and the eyewitness accounts of people who seemingly have no moitvation to lie, and who don't appear to have any connection to one another, w/r/t the presense of men in the kill zone, on the ground.  I wish Oliver Stone woulf make another movie, but this time just stick to the facts.  JFK is great, except it's about as fact-based as Shrek II. 

Agree 100%.  There are some awfully fishy things that could use a lot of explanation, but Ruby was a blabbermouth and generally an idiot....he believed he was going to be beloved by killing Oswald. He was as much a part of the mob as I am.  


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 1581
Posted: #47

Oswalt fired the first 2 shots...secret service guy hickey picked up a loaded ar 15 to retaliate and fell backwards when car accelerated accidently firing and blowing off pres head.. read the smoking gun.. great book

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1496
Posted: #48
My money is on the U.S. Department of Defense.  Prolly the only agency that could of pulled this off.  Forget the CIA, they make way too many mistakes.
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 6349
Posted: #49
look whos starting a thread about conspiracies 


oy vey~ 





All Forums | General Discussion
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.