Connally and the JFK assassination

As im sure you Kenndy Assassination researchers know that Texas Gov John Connally was in the the lime with kennedy when he was shot. Do you think it is possible that Connally was the target of the assassination and that kennedy got hit by mistake. I believe the gemstone file says something about this. It is claimed that Oswalds job was to shoot at Connally which he did, but Connally didnt die. They also mention that the doctor who took care of connally was shipped of to afganistan in the 70s. Anyoneheard anything bout this? what do you think?

This theory ignores the mountains of evidence that Oswald had no active role in the assassination, much less any shooting.

Dr. Robert R. Shaw, a thoracic surgeon and Connally's emergency doctor, did go to Kabul, Afghanistan in the early 1960's as a medical missionary. He is considered a pioneer in thoracic surgery.

www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...

[edit on 21-7-2006 by maynardsthirdeye2]

Do you think it is possible that Connally was the target of the assassination and that kennedy got hit by mistake.

Aside from what maynardsthirdeye said....what would be the motive for assassinating Connally?....I mean really?

Here's an idea: Maybe Connally was cheating on his wife, so his wife set up the whole thing to have him killed...and he was supposed to be killed while making it look like the attempt was on the life of JFK???

BRILLIANT!

Proponents of that theory claim that Connally, as Secretary of the Navy under Kennedy, signed Oswald's dishonorable discharge papers and he resented it up to that day in Dallas. Nellie Connally, wife of John, claims as much in interviews.

CONNALLY: Well -- and did you know that Lee Harvey Oswald was given a dishonorable discharge from the Navy? It was signed by John Connally.

transcripts.cnn.com...

There are several problems with this claim though. Oswald was not given a dishonorable but and undesirable discharge (it was incorrectly reported to his mother as dishonorable) from the Marine Corps on September 13, 1960, the year before Connally was appointed Secretary. Oswald did, however, petition Connally to review his discharge but it was never changed.

Originally posted by maynardsthirdeye2
Proponents of that theory claim that Connally, as Secretary of the Navy under Kennedy, signed Oswald's dishonorable discharge papers and he resented it up to that day in Dallas. Nellie Connally, wife of John, claims as much in interviews.

CONNALLY: Well -- and did you know that Lee Harvey Oswald was given a dishonorable discharge from the Navy? It was signed by John Connally.

I'm sure he signed quote a few dishonorable discharge papers in his time. I'm sure he signed a lot of papers, period. I doubt Oswald had a grudge. That's like saying the president of your school signed your diploma because he liked you. Nonsense. It's his job. He probably doesn't even know you, just like Connally probably didn't know Oswald.

Since there is a strong argument that William Greer (the driver) was one of the shooters, I find it highly unlikely that Connally was the intended target.

It's kinda hard to miss, that badly, when you're basically at "point blank" range.

There was also the stand down of the President's Secret service bodyguards.

Connally (if not involved) was likely just in the wrong place at the wrong time.


[edit on 7/22/06 by redmage]

Since there is a strong argument that William Greer (the driver) was one of the shooters, I find it highly unlikely that Connally was the intended target.

Wrong. There is NO evidence that Greer was one of the shooters. NONE!!



This image goes from frame 311 to 316 of the Z film. There is no gun in Greer's hand...it appears his left hand is on the steering wheel as a matter of fact. YOUR supposed evidence is an illusion of a gun which is the sun reflecting off the top of the front passenger' head and what is an illusion of an arm is actually the curb on the sidewalk next to the car.

Where is Greer's gun? WHERE?? I am so sick of "THE DRIVER DID IT" theories.....it is RIDICULOUS!!


[edit on 22-7-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
Wrong. There is NO evidence that Greer was one of the shooters. NONE!!

Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and as I said, there is an argument that Greer was a shooter.

I did not say, "it's a fact that Greer shot him", as I was not there to see the events of that day, and most of the video evidence (including your .gif) that I've seen has been "touched/cleaned up" (aka edited).

Still, due to the President's Secret Service bodyguard's stand down (and other facts involved) I find it highly unlikely that Connally was the intended target that day.

[edit on 7/22/06 by redmage]

Since there is a strong argument that William Greer (the driver) was one of the shooters

Oh sorry...my mistake. You said "strong argument." Okay....there is NO strong argument. There is an extremely weak argument...since ALL the evidence makes it quite clear that the driver DID NOT shoot Kennedy. Actually, is that even a weak argument? I think that would make it a non-argument.....

Again, you are certainly entitled to your opinion on the matter but, you're getting sidetracked and living up to your moniker.

The topic at hand is "Connally and the JFK assassination" not the "Z film" (or various edits of it).

Does your opinion on Greer's level of activity (or lack thereof) somehow change your views on Connally being the intended target that day?

If not, then it's best to leave further opinions on the various edits of the "Z film" to another thread, as not to hijack this one, since analysis of the film could go on for pages.

[edit on 7/22/06 by redmage]

Does your opinion on Greer's level of activity (or lack thereof) somehow change your views on Connally being the intended target that day?

No it doesn't. I still think it is quite humorous that anyone would think that Connally was the target that day!

Wow, I've only been here two days, and I've already seen alot of rather rash comments from the previous poster, towards fellow members.

I'm no mod, but I think it's safe to say that this is a conspiracy theory board, and all opinions - so long as staying on topic - should be welcomed without such disrespect.

I'll move on in saying that, although it is an interesting topic to look into, there is just far to much pointing at Kennedy being the target. Much evidence in the JFK assasination case, but also much evidence on a much larger scale. That scale being the tale of his brother Bobby and his brother Edward. Also, Monroe. When all 4 are taken into consideration, there is no doubt in my mind the target was absolutely meant to be President John F. Kennedy.

i have started to develop a bit of a theroy about the kennedy assassination and connally. I rember hearing about a employee at Jack Rubys club who over heard him and a "leon oswald" plotting to assassinate connally a few months before the actual event. We know the sights on Oswalds rifle were bad, and that he wasnt the greatest shot of all time.

For the sake of the argument assume that Oswald really was trying to wack Connally, and for the sake of the argument is the only gunman. He doesnt shoot as the limo as it comes up Houstan, towads him because he cant hit Connally, hes protected by the windscreen. And if he shoots at the limo in deally plaza, kennedy is doing the secret services job and providing a barrier. With the tention of the moment, poor quality of rifel and scope, wind, movemnt of limo, perhaps Oswald misses, hitting kennedy. The head wound, if it came from the back hit only the top right side of kennedys skull by an inch. Oswald is not the best shot, but he was trained in the marrines.

oh yeah and Oswald was never in the Navy. He was in the Marrines, so they're is no reason for this grudge.

I sincerely believe Connally was not the target, nor that Oswald did any shooting that day. He tested negative for gunpowder on his hands and arms.

I do believe that Connally added to the dis-information after the fact by introducting the "slump forward" term describing the moment JFK was shot in the head, because the Zapruder film clearly shows the opposite i.e. a violent throw backwards.

He later admitted he did not believe the Warren Commission were correct in their findings.

BTW: They surgically removed bullet fragments big enough to construct half a bullet out of Connally, but still the buillet that supposedly hit him which was found on a stretcher in Park Land Memorial Hospital did not miss any fragments and was in pristine condition. Imagine that....

[edit on 27-7-2006 by HardToGet]

OK
The tests they did on oswald had no real value. They would get false positives and negitives all the time. In a police test a man emptied his service revolver at a target (and revolvers are netorous for redirecting gunpower residue backwards), then failed one of these parfim tests.

Also the bullet that fell out of connally was not pristene. It weighed far less then a similar bullet, but adding all fragments from non fatal wounds, then it is the proper weight. Usually CE399 or the "Magic Bullet" good side is shown. Look at some pictires from other angles, especilly the bottom. The lead was squeezed out the back of the bullet by the force of the impact, like dropping a tube of tooth paste with out a back off a 20 story building. On impact lead was forced out the back while the rest continued through connally. The bullet alsmot stopped by the time it hit Connallys leg, it almsot didnt penetrate.

Sorry squidbones, I am not convinced by those remarks at all.

The "Magic Bullit Theory" is one of the most baffling lies ever told to the world.

Just my opinion ofcourse. Everyone else believes it right?