JFK assassination.

[paddyberger15]

Just in case anyone is interested, 'JFK inside the target car', which is a decent programme on the subject, is on today at 2pm on SKY channel 522 Discovery Knowledge and repeated at 3pm on channel 557.

 

And then again at 8pm and 9pm, same channels.

[Trumo]

I believe there was more than just 1 gunman. Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the plot, but then marginalised in the escape. The plotters had to distance themselves from him as soon as possible, which is why he realised not long after the shooting that he was being set up as the "patsy". The plot was definitely conceived after the failed Bay Of Pigs invasion after so many people were left stranded.

 

My main bone of contention with the Warren Commission report is how it focussed on the lone gunman theory despite evidence to the contrary, and it discounted sworn witness statements as immaterial. Much like when the Hillsborough investigation only looked at events after 3:15pm, ignoring all that went before.

 

I don't think there was a pact between the CIA and the Mob, although members of each were no doubt involved. Those implicated either wiped out others to cover themselves, or were themselves wiped out.

[JohnnyH]

My belief, after years of loving the idea of there been multiple gunmen, is that Oswald was the only one. All the myths of magic bullets and that it is impossible to make the shot he did, are exactly that, myths. In my opinion Oswald acted alone.

 

I'm looking forward to this show at 2pm though. so thanks PB15. Should be good.

[paddyberger15]

My belief, after years of loving the idea of there been multiple gunmen, is that Oswald was the only one. All the myths of magic bullets and that it is impossible to make the shot he did, are exactly that, myths. In my opinion Oswald acted alone.

 

I'm looking forward to this show at 2pm though. so thanks PB15. Should be good.

 

Most of the myths have been debunked for me mate, as I have said during this thread, virtually all of my questions have been answered, and if there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy by rogue elements of the CIA and Cold Warriors, then Oswald trumped them and got in first.

 

There was only one gunman in Dealey Plaza that day and the big blast where Kennedys head disintegrates is an exit would, not an entrance wound. There was no assassin behind the picket fence on the Knoll, the only shooter was in the Texas Book Depository.

 

The only conjecture is about whether Oswald was that lone shooter and I think once you learn about Oswald the man, there is little doubt left as to whether it could be him and the reasons why he would have done it.

[RED.DUB]

the magic bullet theory is not actually fact,all down to oliver stones licence with the truth,who knew,i didnt until a few weeks back.:lol:

like all conspiracy theories theres not a chance in hell that the thousands of people who would have heard about the truth would have kept quiet this long.

it was oswald.

[paddyberger15]

I believe there was more than just 1 gunman. Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the plot, but then marginalised in the escape. The plotters had to distance themselves from him as soon as possible, which is why he realised not long after the shooting that he was being set up as the "patsy". The plot was definitely conceived after the failed Bay Of Pigs invasion after so many people were left stranded.

 

My main bone of contention with the Warren Commission report is how it focussed on the lone gunman theory despite evidence to the contrary, and it discounted sworn witness statements as immaterial. Much like when the Hillsborough investigation only looked at events after 3:15pm, ignoring all that went before.

 

I don't think there was a pact between the CIA and the Mob, although members of each were no doubt involved. Those implicated either wiped out others to cover themselves, or were themselves wiped out.

 

All of the objective evidence suggests otherwise. As I have said earlier in the thread, The Warren Commission report arrived at the right conclusion, but for the wrong reasons.

There was no 'magic bullet', once you see the relative positions of Connolly and Kennedy inside the car, it is easily explained away. Oswald could do the shooting and there was only one gunman....the number of shots fired proves that.

There may well have been elements who wanted Kennedy dead, Oswald may well have had ONI and CIA connections, but he was a lone nut and there was only one gunman in Dallas that day and it was him.

[JohnnyH]

Well that was interesting enough. If anything it just confirmed what I already knew. That the bullet came from the book depository and from Oswalds gun. Good to see an interview with someone who was actually in the car though. However, like most of these programs, they dragged out an hour of TV with only about 20 mins worth of actual interest.

[paddyberger15]

Well that was interesting enough. If anything it just confirmed what I already knew. That the bullet came from the book depository and from Oswalds gun. Good to see an interview with someone who was actually in the car though. However, like most of these programs, they dragged out an hour of TV with only about 20 mins worth of actual interest.

 

Yeah, that's a pretty fair assessment, it was a programme about the science of it all, what was possible and what wasn't....without conjecture.

Johnny, have you seen the programme from about 3-4 years ago about the assassination? The one where Gavin Essler, the former Newsreader, did the voice over? That is fairly definitive for my money. I'd been having doubts for a while before I saw that, and while I called Essler all the bastards under the Sun afterwards, the reason why was because a Star in my Night sky dwindled and died that night, it proved to me what I had secretly suspected for a while. There was only one Gunman.

If yoiu haven't seen it, try youtube, if it's not on there, I will mail you next time I see it on Discovery or whichever channel.

A few of the JFK assassination programmes and most of the books are old hat now, technology and science have superceded them and the theories have become redundant.

The JFK film, while it has some merit as a Hollywood production is fatally flawed in many ways and I can't watch it anymore.

[JohnnyH]

I have indeed mate. And it was probably the final thing that convinced me once and for all that it was a single gunman. My grandfather was in charge of Kennedys security at Dail Eireann when he came to Ireland in 1963 and we have pictures of my granddad with JFK. He even went to the white house later that year on an invitation by the president and met him again. He really admired the man. He spoke of death threats made against him when visiting Ireland and my mother remembers him saying that he was convinced Kennedy would be killed because of his politics and efforts to tidy up all aspects of the political elite in Washington and the mob. From then until when my grandfather died in 1994 he firmly believed that the American government had killed Kennedy and he refused to ever go back to the States on the back of this. I’d have loved to hear his views had he ever got to see the Esler program as while he was a huge fan of Kennedy, he was an open minded military man and he would have taken it on board and it would have resulted in some fantastic conversations. My mother however will not accept it, but I think that is more out of honour to her dead father then anything else. I don't argue it with her.

 

The whole Kennedy thing is an enduring story that people don’t want to have such a pathetic and simple ending. The idea of Kennedy been killed by the Government he ran is somehow a fitting end for such a story of the man. It’s like the shooting of Dr King and how he probably couldn’t have done better work for equal rights in his life, then what was achieved on the back of his death. As Esler talker about, and I believe him to be spot on, that the idea for so many people that Kennedys life could have been ended by a skinny loon with issues but with a decent shot was not acceptable and so it was, and still is, a hell of a lot easier to believe in grassy knolls, and turkey shoots, and multiple gunmen, and magic bullets, despite more and more evidence showing that it simply couldn't have been.

[JohnnyH]

Any idea what that documentary was called Paddy, would love to watch it myself, i've read numerous books and documentarys on this subject myself, i've been fascinated by this since my teens.

 

It was called "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy"

[paddyberger15]

It was called "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy"

 

That's the one. It's well worth watching CW, it does the science and ballistics properly, takes away the conjecture and shows via a computer generated model which was years in the making, how the shots could have only come from one place. It puts the tin hat on it for me.

Like all conspiracy theories, in the end, it strips away the myths and shows what happened in objective terms.

What usually happens in these cases is a twofold scenario...

 

1. Scales of justice. On the one hand, you have someone or something of vast importance and on the other hand you have the mundane...whether that be JFK, 9/11, The Titanic etc...in this case you have the President of the USA, a Liberal icon, the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth taken out by some no mark. The scales of justice just aren't balanced, so the human mind needs a conspiracy on a grand scale to even out the balance.

 

2. People are seeing or think they are seeing stuff that they just don't understand. They look for a needle in a haystack and when they find something that looks like a needle, they disregard the haystack. All hypotheses in things that aren't an exact science are built on mistakes and only when those mistakes have been exposed can progress be made. That holds true for many scenarios...be it the assassination of JFK, Roswell, The Loch Ness Monster or whatever.....people want it to be something grand, when in actual fact, it is actually run of the mill and people just misinterpret what they have seen.

 

All conspiracy theories do is highlight discrepancies in events, but eventually, with progress, those discrepancies are ironed out by looking at objective evidence. Everyone likes a whodunnit and want to be the ones who 'solved' these great mysteries but ultimately, what actually happens is as dull as it comes. People want to believe in something grand and become obsessed with the small details whilst disregarding what is obvious to the trained eye.

 

Science ultimately moves on, and usually from mistakes, Paeleontology is a good example of this. By proving what was once a widely held belief wrong, does it progress towards what was right. Technology moves on, myths and misinformation are debunked, that is the essence of science. When I was a nipper T Rex walked upright and was the Alpha predator of all time, whereas in actual fact it was nothing of the sort.

[paddyberger15]

Thanks fella's, will keep my eye out for that one.

 

Try youtube mate, if there is no joy there, I'll message you next time I see it on.

[paddyberger15]

Google'd the documentary and come across this..

 

Review of The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy - The Education Forum

 

Bit of a debate on the documentary itself lads.

 

Good linkage, I'll have a read of that later, cheers.

[Trumo]

Some conspiracy theorists believe the US government was more than involved in the assassination. Some of it is to do with Kennedy's perceived procrastination on whether to deploy in Vietnam, and how trigger-happy generals were itching to get out there for some action. I really don't think it goes to the highest levels of the administration, but some people further down may have wanted to be involved perhaps having felt they'd been wronged in some way. Who knows.

 

One of the many nagging doubts is the fact that the authorities wrapped up the case in near record time. This is what led many to believe it was all a plot aimed at changing and dictating the path of US foreign policy in a different direction to that which Kennedy was intent on taking it. The US government needed Vietnam to wipe over the utter disaster of the failed attempt to remove Castro from power in Cuba.

 

You can go round in circles, looking at every argument and counter-argument, at every theory, and come to different conclusions based on the importance you give to all the pieces of evidence. Untimately, unless you were a fly on the wall that day, you couldn't possibly know exactly who did what and when.

[paddyberger15]

Cheers Paddy

 

The Litmus Test was that on the day of the shooting every body looked and ran towards the Texas Book Depository, despite what other versions tell you.

The 'bibles' of Conspiracy theory up until recent times were 'Six seconds in Dallas' by Josia Thompson, 'Crossfire' By Jim Marrs and 'On the trail of the assassins' by Jim Garrison...from which the JFK film mostly came from. While JFK was a good film, there was a massive dose of poetic involved and the progress of science has shown that all of those books are fundamentally flawed when challenged in relation to the objective evidence.

A main plank of the Garrison theory is that Oswald didn't shoot Officer JD Tippet whilst leaving the scene of the assassination....he says there is little evidence of this and if he could be framed for one shooting then he could be framed for the other. In actual fact there is overwhelming evidence that Oswald shot Tippet, so the theory that an innocent man walking from the scene wouldn't have anything to hide is well and truly debunked.

Garrison and others also use as evidence that Oswalds use of the word 'patsy' at the Dallas Police Station interview is evidence that he knew he had been 'sheepdipped' by the CIA and set up, whereas, if you turn it round to accept that he had low level links to local FBI and CIA involvement would lead you to the conclusion that he knew the term and would use it as a reason for innocence.

I think once you see what is before you and staring you in the face, you see the 'evidence' in a different light.

[paddyberger15]

Some conspiracy theorists believe the US government was more than involved in the assassination. Some of it is to do with Kennedy's perceived procrastination on whether to deploy in Vietnam, and how trigger-happy generals were itching to get out there for some action. I really don't think it goes to the highest levels of the administration, but some people further down may have wanted to be involved perhaps having felt they'd been wronged in some way. Who knows.

 

One of the many nagging doubts is the fact that the authorities wrapped up the case in near record time. This is what led many to believe it was all a plot aimed at changing and dictating the path of US foreign policy in a different direction to that which Kennedy was intent on taking it. The US government needed Vietnam to wipe over the utter disaster of the failed attempt to remove Castro from power in Cuba.

 

You can go round in circles, looking at every argument and counter-argument, at every theory, and come to different conclusions based on the importance you give to all the pieces of evidence. Untimately, unless you were a fly on the wall that day, you couldn't possibly know exactly who did what and when.

 

I'm not saying that there wasn't a wish amongst renegade elements of the CIA and the Military Industrial Complex to have Kennedy out of the picture, the Bay of Pigs and views on Vietnam would have made him public enemy number 1 as far as they were concerned, what I'm saying is that, for all their planning, if it happened, then Oswald beat them to the punch.

As Hercules Parrot said in all of those dreary Agatha Christie novels, use the leedle grey cells, look at the psychology of the crime and the suspect. Once you research what Oswald was all about it doesn't take any kind of leap of faith to believe he could and would have done it.

Oswald was a no mark who craved and courted publicity, he was the kind of fella who, if the Government had made Shampoo illegal on a Friday night, would have been standing on a street corner on Saturday morning drinking shampoo. His whole 'defection' to and return from the USSR proved that he was a nobody and of little or no use or importance to either side.

[a stoner]

I have watched a few documentries on this and to be honest I doubt Oswald could have done it alone or even at all. Apart from anything else in one of them they say his gun was not sighted properly and if he had aimed at JFK he would have missed by around 6 feet. We will never know the truth on this one as even if it was an internal job no records of it would have been kept. Too many holes and not enough bullets.

[paddyberger15]

I have watched a few documentries on this and to be honest I doubt Oswald could have done it alone or even at all. Apart from anything else in one of them they say his gun was not sighted properly and if he had aimed at JFK he would have missed by around 6 feet. We will never know the truth on this one as even if it was an internal job no records of it would have been kept. Too many holes and not enough bullets.

 

A test was done with his gun and debunked that myth mate. The gun was more than useable and could have done the job.

[Guest davelfc]

Everyone knows that JFK was assassinated by the US government because he was about to tell the world that the moon landings were faked. Even though they did not take place until 6 years later. eh, eh?

 

He also ordered the release of the Roswell files as he believed the public should know about the discovery of alien life. Even though it was a weather balloon/military craft.

 

I have absolutely no proof but plenty of suspicion and conjecture. Which are types of proof/evidence. Oh and I have some pictures to prove it but they're really blurred and show little detail.

[a stoner]

A test was done with his gun and debunked that myth mate. The gun was more than useable and could have done the job.

 

I didn't say the gun wasn't useable but it wasn't sighted right for the distance and anyone who has used a gun, more than fucking about at the fairground, will know this is vital. Also bullets are bi-directional they can't even have their tregectory bent let alone go round corners.

[paddyberger15]

I didn't say the gun wasn't useable but it wasn't sighted right for the distance and anyone who has used a gun, more than fucking about at the fairground, will know this is vital. Also bullets are bi-directional they can't even have their tregectory bent let alone go round corners.

 

Why would the bullets have to go round corners?

[torahboy]

Mmm. So they reckon that really was JFK in that car? I heard that it was a double. Similar to the doppelganger Paul McCartney that still masquerades as 'Macca' to this day. Like, when did the real McCartney ever have orange hair?

[a stoner]

Why would the bullets have to go round corners?

 

Bullet trajectory. If there was one shooter in the book repository then the bullets would have had to go round corners to match the tracks in the body and ricochete is out of the queation as he was sitting in a car. Also the time between the shots is too short to engage the next bullet, aim and fire with that accuracy.

[paddyberger15]

Bullet trajectory. If there was one shooter in the book repository then the bullets would have had to go round corners to match the tracks in the body and ricochete is out of the queation as he was sitting in a car. Also the time between the shots is too short to engage the next bullet, aim and fire with that accuracy.

 

You are 10 years behind the times mate. Science is a self correcting system and that myth was debunked a long time ago.

Now...the Earth....flat or round?

[Trumo]

Safe to say that JFK was not The One.