Anybody that watches the video footage of the assassination knows JFK got hit by two bullets. The first one hit his neck somewhere while the second one blew out his brains.
As soon as you eliminate the single bullet theory the whole premise falls apart. One in the throat, one in the back and then one (or possibly two) to the head.
They made fun of the single bullet theory on a third season episode of Seinfeld. Newman believed that Keith Hernandez spit on him and Kramer following a 1987 game at Shea. The spit followed Newman saying "Nice game, pretty boy" to Keith following a loss.
True, but that is impossible unless you run the government and get rid of the laws of physics. Might as well since they are breaking so many other laws on a daily basis.
Here are a couple of videos that show an Aussie/American forensics team recreating the magic bullet theory. They damn near got it perfect, but not all the environmental conditions were perfect.
Part 1Part 2
They do not claim this was the shot that killed Kennedy, and they don't speculate on what did. They only set out to see if the theory was correct.
The bullet did not change direction. At the exact moment of the hit, and two men were in a straight line from the sixth floor window. This was demonstrated with computer analysis in the 90s.
Oswald attended classes in Russian in the CIA. He worked a top secret position in Japan with flight paths of the U2. Later after the USSR, he comes back and then shoots Kennedy.
The first shot hit a light signal pole and hit the curb. The second shot went through Kennedy and connally. They were in line for the shot. The third shot hit the rear of his head and exited the right front.
The CIA has been behind the entire conspiracy ideas to deflect from their role with Oswald. THIS was the reason this has been a problem for so long.
I’ve studied this for years, and there is NO real hard evidence for another shooter.
Nope. I talked to the officer over the dispatch office at the time. He wrote a book on it. The HSCA WANTED to show conspiracy and relied on acoustics evidence, which was an incorrect assumption on their part. The motorcycle patrolman in question was at the trade mart and then proceeded to the hospital as the motorcade sped by.
An analysis by the committee of the statements of witnesses in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, moreover, showed that about 44 percent were not able to form an opinion about-the origin of the shots,(173) attesting to the ambiguity showed in the August 1978 experiment. Seventy percent of the witnesses in 1963 who had an opinion as to origin said it was either the book depository or the grassy knoll.21(174) Those witnesses who thought the shots originated from the grassy knoll represented 30 percent of those who chose between the knoll and the book depository and 21 percent of those who made a decision as to origin. Since most of the shots fired on November 22, 1963 (three out of four, the committee determined) came from the book depository, the fact that so many witnesses thought they heard shots from the knoll lent additional weight to a conclusion that a shot came from there.
Hard evidence…Oswald’s prints on the rifle found. Three spent rifle shells found. Leaves wedding ring behind for wife. Paper bag found by window where he shot from. Two fellows below him got dust in their head from him shooting right above them, and heard the click click of the bolt action. He fired his revolver at the arresting officer who managed to get his hand at the hammer in time for a misfire. His fingerprints were on boxes in the sixth floor window.
Hard evidence….sorry to keep bringing this up. But it does not go away with time.
Acoustic evidence is hard evidence. People’s perceptions of events fluctuates from what they experience. One person hears three shot another person hears four…HSCA experts gave a 95% chance of a fourth shot. Like DNA results, the acoustic is near absolute
Some would argue that it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter, because there wasn't enough time from the shooting until he was found in the lunch room, must moments afterwards.
So, if it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter ...
My conclusion is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that Oswald did it, especially as a lone gunman.
Nothing has ever been convincing that the head shot came from the rear and not from the front/side.
That is the main reason I conclude there had to be more than 1 shooter.
Whether or not Oswald was a shooter is less clear, but I lean strongly to no, based on rifle fuckery and him being spotted having lunch moments later.
His statement "I'm just a patsy" makes all the sense in the world -- especially when Rubenstein brazenly shot him in public shortly therefter. Somebody wanted Oswald dead VERY badly.
The only reason I keep spouting off here is I want the TRUTH. In 1988, I sounded like all of you fellows. I’d read Jim Marrs book, and about four others on the assassination. After interviewing the fellows in and around the investigation, I changed my mind. I only looked at the evidence.
I’m not here to criticize at all..just to discuss. I remain TOTALLY OPEN to any new evidence, including the unredacted memos which are yet to be released.
And finally I’ve been led, especially with all I’ve gleaned from this site, the conclusion that I’ve stated multiple times here….Oswald was the shooter, and the three letter agencies are most likely the ones who promoted conspiracy theories to deflect examination of Oswald and his actual training and background.
Anybody that watches the video footage of the assassination knows JFK got hit by two bullets. The first one hit his neck somewhere while the second one blew out his brains.
As soon as you eliminate the single bullet theory the whole premise falls apart. One in the throat, one in the back and then one (or possibly two) to the head.
They made fun of the single bullet theory on a third season episode of Seinfeld. Newman believed that Keith Hernandez spit on him and Kramer following a 1987 game at Shea. The spit followed Newman saying "Nice game, pretty boy" to Keith following a loss.
The single bullet theory is not about the number of shots. It's about a single bullet hitting both JFK and Gov. Connelly.
True, but that is impossible unless you run the government and get rid of the laws of physics. Might as well since they are breaking so many other laws on a daily basis.
Why is it Impossible?
Because bullets don't change directions on a whim.
Here are a couple of videos that show an Aussie/American forensics team recreating the magic bullet theory. They damn near got it perfect, but not all the environmental conditions were perfect. Part 1 Part 2
They do not claim this was the shot that killed Kennedy, and they don't speculate on what did. They only set out to see if the theory was correct.
It's a straight line shot once you put Connelly where he was sitting. 18 inches in front and to the left of JFK.
The entrance wound on his back was elliptical. Suggesting a bullet that is not a straight on shot but deflected off axis.
The bullet did not change direction. At the exact moment of the hit, and two men were in a straight line from the sixth floor window. This was demonstrated with computer analysis in the 90s.
The single bullet theory was horseshit then, and it's horseshit now.
Oswald attended classes in Russian in the CIA. He worked a top secret position in Japan with flight paths of the U2. Later after the USSR, he comes back and then shoots Kennedy.
The first shot hit a light signal pole and hit the curb. The second shot went through Kennedy and connally. They were in line for the shot. The third shot hit the rear of his head and exited the right front.
The CIA has been behind the entire conspiracy ideas to deflect from their role with Oswald. THIS was the reason this has been a problem for so long.
I’ve studied this for years, and there is NO real hard evidence for another shooter.
The US Congress, in their SECOND investigation into the murder of JKF, concluded otherwise:
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1b.html#summary
In addition, there is no HARD evidence that Oswald was a shooter at all -- lone, or otherwise.
What about the soft evidence?
Immediately leaves work. Only person to do so. Takes a cab, a bus, goes home changes clothes, gets his pistol, shoots a cop.
Nope. I talked to the officer over the dispatch office at the time. He wrote a book on it. The HSCA WANTED to show conspiracy and relied on acoustics evidence, which was an incorrect assumption on their part. The motorcycle patrolman in question was at the trade mart and then proceeded to the hospital as the motorcade sped by.
An analysis by the committee of the statements of witnesses in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, moreover, showed that about 44 percent were not able to form an opinion about-the origin of the shots,(173) attesting to the ambiguity showed in the August 1978 experiment. Seventy percent of the witnesses in 1963 who had an opinion as to origin said it was either the book depository or the grassy knoll.21(174) Those witnesses who thought the shots originated from the grassy knoll represented 30 percent of those who chose between the knoll and the book depository and 21 percent of those who made a decision as to origin. Since most of the shots fired on November 22, 1963 (three out of four, the committee determined) came from the book depository, the fact that so many witnesses thought they heard shots from the knoll lent additional weight to a conclusion that a shot came from there.
Hard evidence…Oswald’s prints on the rifle found. Three spent rifle shells found. Leaves wedding ring behind for wife. Paper bag found by window where he shot from. Two fellows below him got dust in their head from him shooting right above them, and heard the click click of the bolt action. He fired his revolver at the arresting officer who managed to get his hand at the hammer in time for a misfire. His fingerprints were on boxes in the sixth floor window.
Hard evidence….sorry to keep bringing this up. But it does not go away with time.
Acoustic evidence is hard evidence. People’s perceptions of events fluctuates from what they experience. One person hears three shot another person hears four…HSCA experts gave a 95% chance of a fourth shot. Like DNA results, the acoustic is near absolute
See post above that starts with Nope. Thanks.
“When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Arthur Conan Doyle
That statment does not mean to ignore evidence.
Some would argue that it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter, because there wasn't enough time from the shooting until he was found in the lunch room, must moments afterwards.
So, if it was impossible for Oswald to be a shooter ...
You’re correct. If the single bullet theory is incorrect, then it’s impossible for a lone gunman conclusion
My conclusion is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that Oswald did it, especially as a lone gunman.
Nothing has ever been convincing that the head shot came from the rear and not from the front/side.
That is the main reason I conclude there had to be more than 1 shooter.
Whether or not Oswald was a shooter is less clear, but I lean strongly to no, based on rifle fuckery and him being spotted having lunch moments later.
His statement "I'm just a patsy" makes all the sense in the world -- especially when Rubenstein brazenly shot him in public shortly therefter. Somebody wanted Oswald dead VERY badly.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/contents.htm
Just for anyone wondering, the URL contains tracking information.
?si= part of the the URL stands for Share Identifier and what follows after = identifies behind-the-scenes which YouTube account shared the link.
Tip: Copy the link and remove everything after (also including) the question mark ?
Thank you! I’m not very good at this.
Sharing is caring!
In all cases when it comes to YouTube, except playlists, it is safe to remove everything after the ? to remove URL-based tracking.
For playlists, the URL contains ?list= - in these cases, remove anything after the first & character after the ? (also including the ampersand &)
The only reason I keep spouting off here is I want the TRUTH. In 1988, I sounded like all of you fellows. I’d read Jim Marrs book, and about four others on the assassination. After interviewing the fellows in and around the investigation, I changed my mind. I only looked at the evidence.
I’m not here to criticize at all..just to discuss. I remain TOTALLY OPEN to any new evidence, including the unredacted memos which are yet to be released.
And finally I’ve been led, especially with all I’ve gleaned from this site, the conclusion that I’ve stated multiple times here….Oswald was the shooter, and the three letter agencies are most likely the ones who promoted conspiracy theories to deflect examination of Oswald and his actual training and background.