Bullet analysis casts doubt on lone gunman in JFK assassination (Dallas Morning News)

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/091408dnmetjfkbullets.da2836.html ^

[Doug TX]

........... The professor of statistics at Texas A&M University organized a six-member team that compared the composition of bullet fragments from the JFK shooting with other bullets from the same manufacturer.

The group found that those fragments weren't nearly as rare as the government's expert witness concluded in 1976, when Dr. Vincent P. Guinn determined that all five fragments came from two bullets fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. A third shot missed.

"The claim was made that those five fragments could only have come from two bullets," Dr. Spiegelman said. "Our research showed it could have been two or more.

"And if it is more than two, there is an increased likelihood that someone else provided one of them."

....Hence the title of the group's paper: "Chemical and Forensic Analysis of JFK Assassination Bullet Lots: Is a Second Shooter Possible?" The team was honored by the American Statistical Association with its 2008 Statistics in Chemistry award.

The study doesn't say there were two or more gunmen, only that the single-gunman theory can't be supported by science.

[msnpatriot]

Depends on how you look at it, Those people might have wondered how an American president was murdered in broad daylight.

There are some Perry Mason’s left in some of us, we only trust our own instincts!

***Do these people have anything better to do with their time? I guess not.***

[msnpatriot]

Jim Garrisons original book is a good start to learn about the Kennedy Assassination, including laters ones vindicating his early research and case on it.

In my case I'm a conservative who bought into certain conspiracy, and long before I was a freeper.

***Yes, it disheartens me when I see so many freepers who buy into the conspiracy. This is the BIGGEST left-wing lie of THEM ALL!***

[Buffalo Head]

Thanks for the post.

[dfwgator]

Read it. Learn it. Live it.

[word_warrior_bob]

Start Over. Jim Garrison is a loon. Conspiracy books vindicating each other does not a conspiracy make.

Get back to me after you read “Case Closed”.

I’ve read plenty of conspiracy books, I like cloak and dagger stuff, as I mentioned earlier in the thread I LOVE “JFK” by Oliver Stone. I watch all the assasination TV shows too, great FUN.

Did you see the ABC documentary with Peter Jennings of all people that debunked the conspiracy? Recommended.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

[word_warrior_bob]

I long for the day that Kennedy conspiracy theorists are looked at like the 9/11 Truthers.

The “Conspiracy” is the biggest crock of S-— in the history of the universe. At least there remains the possibility of finding life on other planets. There is no chance at finding the “conspirators” regarding JFK.

We got the perp - He’s a little worthless commie/marxists maggot named Oswald. Think DU with Marine Corps. rifle training.

[Buffalo Head]

I have two of these cartridges. The shellcase is constructed of brass and has the headstamp WCC 6.5mm

The bullet is a round nose, full metal jacket type with a lead alloy core and gilding metal jacket. They are quite unlike the Italian version of the round which had an aluminum core in the bullet nose. The Italian bullet jackets usually were nickel-plated.

Subject ammunition was made by Western Cartridge Company (which owned Winchester) circa 1953. The ammunition was made on a U.S. military contract DA-23-196-ORD-27.

Soon after Italy received the ammunition, they decided to adopt the NATO 7.62x51mm cartridge and sold the surplus ammunition to Kliens Sporting Goods in Chicago. That is where Lee Harvey Oswald purchased his rifle and ammunition. There is no physical means available to distinguish these rounds with the ones that Oswald used. They could have come from the same box.

[ReignOfError]

Those people might have wondered how an American president was murdered in broad daylight.

I'd be more dubious if Oswald had pulled the shots off at night.

[freeplancer]

This crime was not solved, it was CLOSED.

[freeplancer]

Just because someone does not swallow everything the government feeds to them, does not make them a kook. You sound like a cop.

[word_warrior_bob]

Go read “CASE CLOSED” and THEN tell me you think it wasn’t Oswald.

[freeplancer]

Let me get this straight, this is a liberal conspiracy but you recommend that a documentary made by ABC and Peter Jennings proves it is not true?!?!? I think you are wrong, the libs are the only ones that have an interest in perptuating a cover up because their beloved pres was killed. They don’t want to beleive that a stupid redneck did it all by himself. You sure are fast with your opinions.

[word_warrior_bob]

The ABC show was excellent, it was centered around a previously done study done by a company that re-creates accidents, etc. using computer models.

READ CASE CLOSED, THEN, get back to me. Until then, you’re peeing into the wind. Reading is your friend.

[Trajan88]

Re: "professor of statistics at Texas A&M University"

The Fighting Farmers make an appearance! Excellent.

TAMU Class of '88; Law Hall (may it R.I.P.) Ramp 9 Mule; f.u.p.! ... BTHO "the u."

[ozzymandus]

Thank you! I was waiting for that guy!

[count-your-change]

Nor does it make them not kooks. Vast conspiracies known only to the unappreciated few make good stories or movies but real life seems more mundane and simple.
A single shooter is more likely than several because as Ben Franklin is quoted, “Two may keep a secret if one of them is dead”.
Oswald didn’t need any help. It only took one man to shoot, it only required a single place to shoot from, it only required a minimum of preparation ahead of time.
I.E., simple plans have the best chance of success and no vast conspiracy is needed, in fact conspiracies often fail because too many people are involved not too few.
Kooks find that not just hard to believe but impossible to believe since it would mean they don’t have superior knowledge and insight unlike the rest of us.
The kooks latch on to the unexplained and unexplainable 1% to discount the clear and reasonable 99%. That’s what makes them and their followers “kooks”.
The truth is usually simple, it’s the lies that are complicated.

5

[freeplancer]

Ben Franklin never heard of “deepthroat” and I am sure there are exceptions to every law of conspiracy or anti-conspiracy. Dismissing people as simpletons or kooks is pretty dangerous territory in my opinion. The majority is not always the best reference. Very interesting subject though, and I consider you a thinker and a reasonologist. I don’t always agree with you, but you are interesting.

[freeplancer]

So I am a non-reader, a rube, a dummy because I don't agree with your point of view? It's funny that you did not reference any BOOKS while you were alluding to your intellectual superiority. You mentioned “Peter Jennings” and “ABC”, and I am pretty sure that those are not titles of any high fallutin'books.

[count-your-change]

Ben may have felt he had his “deep throat” in his illegitimate son William. Here Ben had accepted the boy and raised him yet William was viewed by Ben as a viper in his own bosom when William had his own loyalties to England.
I don't dismiss conspiracy buffs as simpletons, in fact I've found most to be above average in intelligence. Often it seems to be a case of they're being contemptuous of the majority who are gullible and unable to see below the surface of the days events.
Conspiracies are engaged in but due to the character of the people involved and the nature of conspiracies, that they remain hidden, they usually fail.
Look at how well the petty conspiracies of the Nixon Whitehouse worked out as an example.
Oft times too conspiracy theorists confuse secrecy with conspiracy. The government won't show its latest research on aircraft design but I'm fairly sure the reason is not that alien technology is being incorporated and a grand conspiracy in area 51 is taking place.
Conspiracies require the keeping of secrets, the bigger the conspiracy the more difficult the keeping to the point of Franklin's words.
In the case of assassinations a single person is far more dangerous than an army of conspirators.