Tech puts JFK conspiracy theories to rest

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Your talking about dummies right? Did I miss that? Being that dummies have no muscles and all, surely they didn't shoot people?

reply to post by ShatteredSkies


I noticed that you mentioned the fact that he was rated as a sharpshooter in the marines. I'm curious what that means in reality. How many hits at different distances are required to get that badge, and is that the lowest badge for qualification without flunking.

The reason I bring this up, I was US Army a few tears later, and "marksman" was a another word for "just made it". I think it was an idea to convince enemies that every American soldier was a dead shot.

The "sharpshooter" range was also pretty wide, and could be obtained if you could hit, not necessarily make a killing shot, on a minimum number of targets, some almost close enough to spit on. "A sharpshooter", by those standards, was actually just an average shot, much like the backyard "plinker" might be able to do.

The only badge worth having, if you really wanted respect, was the top one of "expert". As I recall, this one required you to only have two misses out of about twenty-five, with ranges up to 100 meters.

To make a killing shot from that window, in that time frame, "downhill" (which throws many people off) at a moving target, is not something an average "sharpshooter" could accomplish. To add to the difficulty, the shooter would have been under enormous stress, and nervousness isn't good for your shooting skills unless you have ice water in your veins.

Further complicating the matter, Oswald only had a limited amount of time to practice with his mail order rifle, and even if he had prior experience with the same type of weapon, just like a lover, each one takes getting used to.

Worse yet for the idea that Oswald killed JFK from that vantage point, is the fact that he was using open sights in the military, where the official version would have us believe he became such a "Dead Eye Dick". A scoped weapon is a whole other ball of wax, because the recoil, even from a rifle, causes some problem with target reacquisition, a time consumimg problem if you haven't used one extensively. (I still hunt with an open sight weapon myself, mainly because, like most people, I'm more comfortable with what I became used to in my youth.)

The same people that say UFOs are improbable, using an Occam's Razor basis, will still support the unlikely idea that this lone gunman made such incredible shots. But I'm not buying it. Not as it stands.

reply to post by ShatteredSkies


The acuostic examination i think you and Billybob are refering to was done in the 80's i think. They had to try and get all the actual tape from the news services. They where all taping live from the scene and did a pretty good job of matching the times and the places that they where recorded from. They could not prove it but the echo from a second shot was definatly heard on thoses tapes. A spike showing a second report that was a sharp as Oswalds could be heard. I remrember seeing it but i can't remember what entity produced it.

Zindo

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand


No, I mean actual HUMAN beings, being shot by German and Japanese and Viet Cong as well as US troops in WW2, Korea, and Viet Nam. Theres miles of footage of men shot during confrontations. Its one of the reasons for combat photographers. They did many studies using the footage for many reasons. One was to show exactly what type of reaction might be caused by being shot by varying calibers and bullits for the Geneva Convention statistical annalysis!

Zindo

reply to post by NGC2736


True NGC, I had read that of 50 targets at 200 yards, he hit 49.

But like you said, it doesn't always mean he's good.

Supposedly a Marine in his squad had commented that Oswald in fact wasn't too good of a shot and was the kind of a person who didn't much care if he missed or hit.

From your experiences, what do you really think? I'm interested in why you think the shot for Oswald wasn't a possible one.

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by NGC2736


I might have posted this in another thread but, i have always wondered why Oswald picked the Carcano or was provided with it. I don;'t know how old many here are but previous to 1965, Kids comic book had adds for all manner of military rifles . Mausers, Enfields, scopes, and they where cheap, Surplus rifles in excellent condition went for 7.50 and if you added a scope it was another 2 bucks, mail order. Oswald, supposedly an ex marine sharpshooter, didn't pick a Mauser or an Enfield or for that matter and 03-a3 Springfield. All vastly superior to the Carcano and nearly the same price always made me wonder about the whole thing!
Zindo


[edit on 11/13/2008 by ZindoDoone]

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Maybe it had something to do with the round?

The Carcano is chambered in 6.5, a departure from those other calibers.

Maybe the secret is in what he desired the round to do? I'm sure there's some specific quality to the rifle that he wanted to have. Or maybe it was the first rifle he saw in whatever magazines he had lying around?

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by ShatteredSkies


Thats just the point I was making. The 6.5 Carcano round is NOT the round most knowledgable assassins would pick. Its anemic and borderline for the job. The others I mentioned are all .30 caliber and have ballistics that are only rivaled by magnum calibers today.

Zindo

Johnson owned stock in Bell helicopter for goodness sake. You know, the company that made Huey's. It really, i promise, is no different today. The good ole boys that wacked Kennedy are the same ones that wacked us at the towers.



It's so Mary Kay...why do you think she was dressed like that? Right before the shot, she gives him her final, "mess around on me ehh...now this happens". It's really hard to admit these things to yourself. I'm afraid 9/11 killed my trust.

The moon, Kennady, Mars, 9/11, Pearl harbor, Even Hiroshima and Nagasaki all Hollywood, all of it under the control of the best story tellers in the world.
Brought to you by the makers of The Bible and Johnson and Johnson.

Kennedy went down because he wanted to go another avenue then war. Why do you think he pushed space so hard. You have to have war to control the markets and Kennedy wanted to make a change. He put together a committee and I can't recall the name at the moment, but it was to figure out a way that society could function with out war while still providing jobs and keeping surplus low. He wanted to bring to an end the way business has been done since the beginning. He died for that, as well as Bobby and John Jr., John Lennon, Martin Luther King or anyone who threatens the way business is run.

Follow the dollars, that is what should really be investigated. Follow that like a bread crumb trail and it will lead you to those with the most to loose.

Peace

Just watching that little clip again, notice how the "motion steadying" just happens to cover the gun when its fired. Just like the cnn banner over the plane going into the building...How convenient.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by letthereaderunderstand]

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Yeah but that is in combat. You made it sound like they were just standing there waiting to be shot? In combat you could fall any way, you could step on a mine and go up even. I don't really think that is comparable to a still target. Either way, I still love your hat Zindo, plus your ronnie post...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

What does reposting my original post prove out of curiosity? That you know how to press the "Quote" button?

It proves that you never did ask the question you are about to tell me that you already asked several times.

IF the Discovery Channel and History Channel or not good legitimate sources of information, then what is?

Sorry but I did not answer that question simply because you did not ask it. You asked what channel you could trust. I said none. You are asking me what is trustworthy? How should I know if you can trust anything. All I know is that you cannot trust tv. Your parents should have told you that anyway. No conspiracy, nothing crazy. TV is entertainment. Fox news is legally an entertainment channel. They had to go to court over it and everything. I have no idea what you expect to get out of me as far as what to trust. I never claimed to have that. I just know that you only learn how to sit and stare from TV. That is all you LEARN.

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand


Thanks, spend some time watching the 'Military Channel'. Specialy about the time period of the Russians taking Berlin and sniper footage during that last year. It will give you an idea of what I'm talking about. You can see nearly every way a person might get shot and how they fell. Mostly, if your standing, sitting or lying you just drop. I own an exact period correct Russian Moison Nagant just like the Russian snipers used. I have shot many types of targets with it ( No Humans) but logs and things that weigh just as much as the average soldier. They just fall over,LOL. It is muscle and nerve reaction that determins this.

Zindo

Project Monarch is a US Defense Department code name assigned to a subsection of the Central Intelligence Agency's Operation Artichoke later become Project MK Ultra.

www.outpost-of-freedom.com...

My guess is Oswald was the man chosen for the operation. He just didn't know it.

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
reply to post by stander

 

What are you talking about? I haven't stated my opinion.



So because you have nothing to say on the topic at hand, you attack my posts?

How do you call your previous posts then? Undeniable facts?

Can't you understand? There is a dude joining in who supports the conspiracy by calling Oswald a "novice shooter." Do you think that you can correct his ignorance by presenting verifiable evidence that Oswald was an excellent gun?

If you think so, then you're wrong. Most of the conspiracies are born out of irreversible ignorance, and this thread is more than supportive of that. If you think that your bickering with the conspirators will change things around, then it's your naive choice. "Conspiracy" is another word for a dogmatic religion. It would take more than three shots point blank to kill this madness.

reply to post by ShatteredSkies

Have you ever noticed in these "recreations" they use a guy that's a well known expert with a rifle? He's resting comfortably in a open perch, the wind is calm, conditions are fine. There's no traffic noise, or birds flying around. He's not juiced up on adrenalin, and he doesn't have to lean out and fire at an angle to his position.

Now this same guy, if you put him in combat, may be such a poor shot you want to slap him when the firefight's over. When there's no fear involved, and no distractions, and it's only a target, being an expert is a lot easier than it is when you're in a "situation".

Just the other day I caught a segment of a reality cop show where they the dash cam catching the action. Three cops had this guy in a van blocked in, and when he run over one of them, everybody opened up. From a distance of four to ten feet. They fired 21 shots and never hit the guy. He surrendered without a scratch. (Fortunately, there were no innocent bystanders.)

When you judge something like this, you have to put yourself in that person's shoes. Otherwise, a conclusion is taken out of context. And the context of this event is far different than some Discovery Channel staged event. Any soldier on this board will tell you that the rifle range doesn't equate to a real confrontation.

Now it's true that no one was shooting back that day in Dallas. But Oswald could not have calmly known that at the time. He had to have thought there might be some return fire. So in essence, he started a firefight. And that's always stressful.

The conditions were not in any way controlled; there were a multitude of things to distract him. He had to make more than one shot before the target was lost, so he would have naturally felt some urgency, another stress. And he was committing a crime, no matter how "right" he might have felt it to be, that if caught for he could expect to ultimately pay for with his life.

But almost as telling, to me at least, is when he supposedly shot. The motorcade was much closer for a period of time that must have been twice what he had when he finally did start firing. If he was such a genius sniper, why not take the easier shot? Why wait idly till the limo is a block away, at an angle, and the trunk area reduces the size of the target to shoulders and head? Any sniper knows to take the shot when you have it. (Yes he would have had to lean further out the window, but it would have literally been like shooting fish in a barrel.)

Context and a lifetime of seeing human nature in action tells me this didn't go down the way we keep being told. I have no proof, or I might be rich and famous, or dead myself, but I personally am convinced that under the conditions of that day, an erratic young man of his caliber, using a less than desirable weapon of choice, (Thank you Zindo), could not have made such a precision kill.

reply to post by ZindoDoone


An excellent point. That would not have been the weapon of choice for a knowledgeable and determined sniper.

I too am long in the tooth, and I well remember those ads for mail order rifles. And there were always more than one company, and a selection of weapons, in almost every magazine. So why chose such a thing?

Very good point.

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Nice...I have an SKS Russian Made. Fires the same round as an Ak-47 (it was the prerunner) 10 round fixed clip, fun as hell. Pop off as fast as you can pull. My dad used to have an AK-47 with a tri-burst speed trigger. I have never had so much fun with a gun in my life (safely of course). I can tell you I've seen many logs dance...I wish he still had it...the smell of gun oil and powder...ahhh. I miss those days.

Honestly, on topic though, the footage is the dead give away. They will run people around for ever with acoustics, up wind, down wind, rounds fired, but the truth is right there. It is just very hard to admit, cause that means...well you know. Money talks, Kennedy's die. I'm sure they put a good threat into her as well along the lines of "if you don't, you will die too, we've got shooters ready to take care if you fail, don't fail and have to go out like that, you have kids and you want to see them again right?".

John Jr. wasn't buying that one, but you can't own a magazine company that is political, that has the power to expose the perps and not have a plane accident that is fatal. Jackie knew that day would come so did Rose...anyway

Peace

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand


I think the Kennedy's where targeted and I think Teddy folded like the cheap suit he is to stay in the senate. JFK was a collector of fine rifles and shotguns. Loved to shoot almost as much as play golf. I think he and Bobby taking on the Teamsters and the Mob as well as the CIA and Cuba was what caused all of the hell the family went and is going through. If Bobby hadn't been such a firebrand trying to make a name for himself and gone slower into the frey, things might have been differant!

Zindo

reply to post by NGC2736


They literally slowed down right in front of Abraham Zapruder, or what about the secret service holding back as they round the corner?

Johnson was not someone to cross and Kennedy didn't take it seriously. "End Vietnam....I don't think so"

I've been there with my father in 1997. My dad is a vet. Do you know that in north vietnam at a War Memorial that a North Vietnamese General exclaims
.

General Giap was a brilliant, highly respected leader of the North Vietnam military. The following quote is from his memoirs currently found in the Vietnam war memorial in Hanoi:

"What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it.

But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!"

Peace

Originally posted by bknapple32


Stories like this have happened before. I remember watching the history channel, and wathing new 3-d models showing how the book depository shot was the lethal shot.


question is... Does this case make it more obvious? Or can we safely knock this off as dis-info?



If this has been posted today, sorry. But I havent seen it in the news section, and I just saw it on MSNBC today.

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The major "Conspiracy" if you will, has in my mind at least, always resided with how deep the Assassination Plot actually went. Oswald was just a patsy, and that was made obvious by Jack Ruby knocking him off in plain sight of the Public, both in front of Law Enforcement Authorities, and the Mainstream Media. The real issue I believe stands with LBJ's contempt towards JFK, and the way in which he exploited a mass variety of individuals, each with their own reasons behind wanting Kennedy knocked off.

In regards to the "Grassy Knoll" however, I saw a Photograph once which seems to display a flash in front of someone dressed in a Police Officer's Uniform:





If you think about it, it would have been the perfect disguise, especially given the idea that if any suspicion were to arise, such a shooter could claim that he was returning fire towards the Assassin located in the Repository.

It is sad no matter how you look at it, as I truly believe JFK was Inspirational, and I also believe that much of what made the Democrat Party great, passed away with him as well. I always refer to Old School Democrats as JFK Democrats, and I believe much of the Party has strayed away from those values. It is an all around shame.