Skip to comments.The JFK files
Posted on 06/01/2007 5:36:49 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5
A storied former prosecutor scrutinizes one of the most debated crimes in American history The murder of President John F. Kennedy has provoked by far more suspicion, argument, obsession, and especially book-publishing than any similar event in American history. Now famed lawyer and true-crime writer Vincent Bugliosi has produced what he hopes will be the book to exceed all others. "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy" may do that, in weight (5.3 pounds) as well as content, but it's clear that if his editor hadn't insisted he turn over the manuscript after 21 years of labor, the almost-superhuman effort might have wrecked his health.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Of course it’s important. If motive is your only proof, Dealy Plaza would have sounded like D-Day.
In order to prove who killed someone, you have to know who pulled the trigger. A fact no conspiracy theorist can explain.
Well yes. As Dorothy Sayers once had her fictional detective Lord Peter Wimsey explain, ciui bono leads to too many false trails. Work out how the murder was committed and that will tell you who was in a position to do it.
Quite true. - In the case at hand, the Warren Commission failed in its Report to 'work out' how the murder was committed. -- And so has every other effort to date.
The case is not closed.
How it was done is explained on post 37. The gifs follow it on other posts.
I’ll try to include the gifs the next time I post the explanation. I’m also looking for the autopsy sketch that shows the bullet hole in the back of the head. It also shows the massive exit wound in the front.
I had to look that one up.
cui bono, “Good for whom?” “Who benefits? ...
Thank you. I learn something every day.
Just try Gerald Posner's 'Case Closed'. You'll thank me for it. It's a book that you won't be able to put down and when you're done you'll tell other people that they need to read it whenever the subject of the murder of JFK pops up.
In fact, if you have all of the major conspiracy authors' books (Lifton's 'Best Evidence', Lane's 'Rush To Judgement' and 'Plausible Denial', etc.) in your library, keep them handy for reference while you're reading 'Case Closed'. Posner buries these works so effectively you'll want to find the conspiracist authors and punch them right in their pinko guts and force them to give you your money and wasted hours back.
Last thing that the commie-libs of the post-McCarthyist 1960s needed was a national concensus that one of their left wing wacko communist sympathizers with an ACLU card in his wallet murdered our American president.
If Lee Harvey Oswald was a man of the age we're in now, he'd be one of the kookiest violence screed posters on DU.com. Why the hell do some Freepers rush to defend an anti-American asshole like that? Someone tell me.
Remember this: ACLU member Lee Harvey Oswald shot NRA member JFK.
The Warren Commission was guilty of that. They didn’t want to come right and say a commie killed the President at the height of the Cold War. They had this vague conclusion that left gaps you could drive a truck through.
My favorite group are the Marines who refuse to believe one of their own killed Kennedy. But then they have to say he was such a lousy shot. Marines are lousy shots at pistol range? With a scoped rifle? In a rest?
They won’t even discuss Charles Whitman. Sheesh.
I very much appreciate all of your effort in this matter. One more question, does the velocity of the bullet striking the skull disperse sufficient energy to cause the head and torso of an adult male to redirect motion and thrust backward as rapidly as it appears to in the Zapruder film?
No, it does not. I understand there are fans of the “Oswald did it” crowd who explain it away by the “jet effect” but I don’t believe it would have caused that much movement. Although the “jet effect” does exist, in other words, some object such as a gelatin filled human skull have jumped forward toward the shooter, the effect appears to be minimal.
There are doctors who have testified that there is no way of predicting which way a body will jump after a head shot. Some snipers in Viet Nam had reported head shot victims would tear up the landscape like headless chickens.
I can only give an opinion on this. Kennedy had a flap of skin fall directly into his face. That’s on the Zapruder film. I believe for a split second he reacted to that as Mrs. Kennedy and Connelly also reacted rather violently to what Prairie Dog Hunters decribe as “red mist”.
Bottom line is Kennedy’s head was pushed forward 2.3 inches from one movie frame to another on impact. Zapruder’s Bell and Howell filmed at, calculated at the assumed speed of 18.3 frames per second, equals .055 seconds (or 55 milliseconds).
When I was just a boy, I actually listened to records concerning some of this stuff, no pictures. This is all very old stuff to me, and always quite frustrating to explain to people who are simply not interested in looking at all of the evidence.
Of course the "Best Evidence is not available, but that is all just coincidence to those of your mind set.
When you listen to the broadcast of Oswald being brought down in the garage to be shot by Ruby, the most compelling question becomes who was driving that car, and why did he beep the horn so timed with the shots that killed Oswald?
Why did the lights flash on that station wagon just before the shooting?
Why do people ignore this stuff?
You go ahead and focus on the marksmanship, and ignore the acoustic evidence that Congress studied, as well as the films that clearly show what happened while all those inept cops stood around in their silly cowboy hats allowing their patsy to take it in the gut.
The bad guys murdered JFK, got away with it, and now they have a bunch of folks carrying their water.
Arlen Specter and Gerald Ford are in my opinion, the scummiest of all in this because they used the situation as a launch to their despicable careers in politics.
Once again we have a conspiracy theorist who provides no proof to who they believe shot Kennedy.
but this time, I’m not going to answer anything you ask.
It’s time you figured out through the proven facts who killed Kennedy. Proven facts, got it?
I’ll give you a hint. It’s not some phantoms hiding behind a rickety fence wearing a Klingon Cloaking Device firing magic, invisible bullets that can turn corners and hop windshields.
How did that shooter get so close to him in a police station?
Why did the car driver beep the horn in such conjunction with the shooting?
Why did the station wagon lights flash just before the horn beeped twice, the second time being an instant before Ruby’s gun went off?
You can focus on the incredible shooting skills of that weirdo Oswald all day, but the real questions that have never been answered have been ignored, and so not at all answered.
What we saw before our eyes was a crime being committed on live TV, and it is rarely touched upon on threads such as this.
It is true that I believe the shooting stuff is a bunch of crap, but I am not asking about that right now
Go ahead and change my position to one where I am clearly not able to argue. I dunno crap about guns and rifles.
It will not be the first time it has happened out here.
Oswald was murdered as part of a conspiracy that involved killing JFK, and you are going to keep talking about what a great Marine shooter he was.
Please......I already heard this dumb stuff, many times.
I saw the tapes of the Zapruder films, and no rational person will ever conclude that JFK was shot from behind.
I cannot for the life of me figure out just why a thinking person would want to get aboard that train that leads to the absurd conclusion that Oswald acted alone.
I do not want to insult you just because you choose to insult my intelligence, so then lets simply agree to disagree, and I'll move on to some other thread on a different subject matter.
You’re a good man Shooter. I appreciate your efforts to help me understand.
I saw the tapes of the Zapruder films, and no rational person will ever conclude that JFK was shot from behind.
Only those who know about guns and rifles can understand the Zapruder film.
And I appreciate you willingness to understand.
I visited the Sixth Floor Museum about a year after I arrived in Dallas. When I looked out the window, I realized it was a murder scene. I still don’t care about the politics or the urban legends. Someone was murdered by gunfire and I wanted to know how it happened.
It wasn’t out of a manhole. Too low.
It wasn’t off the overpass because there was a crowd of railroad workers and two police officers.
It wasn’t from the grassy knoll because Zapruder filmed from there and no one standing with him saw anyone.
That left the sixth floor and the testimony of the two clerks on the fifth.
Plus the trajectories.
Plus the Zapruder film.
Plus the the testimony of Mrs Connelly and the Governor.
Plus more pictures, testimony and hard physical evidence.
It took awhile.
But, The Zapruder film is really not limited to the sharpshooting possibilities and the angles that the Book Depositary provided.
There was that umbrella guy, and the little girl running, and of course the later evidence of the curbstone damage, and more, but clearly...you are not interested in my bringing up any of that stuff.
So let me reiterate, you have some agenda, and I am plainly not interested in it.
You get to have the last word here, because without a doubt, you are going to have at least one more thing to add concerning this subject.
That is OK with me because I already know everything that I need to know about you and your views.
Have a nice day.
Hm. I had never watched the Zapruder film before I downloaded it last night.
It does NOT seem to me that his body is thrown back into the seat. It seems that the bullet blows out his skull, and he falls back against the seat.
I really don’t see where people think he is thrown back against the seat, whether viewed at full speed or frame by frame.
His head barely moves as the tissue exits out the top.
Just my opinion.
Perhaps you do?
Apparently, he was quite chummy with the police. According to Buglosi (and apparently, the Warren Commission) Ruby was a frequent visitor to the inside of the Police station on a social basis. He purchased a stack of ten Pastrami sandwiches to bring down to the station that day, and just walked in. they all knew him. He apparently would go down there and give the cops free passes to his clubs...
He tried to go into the room where Oswald was being interogated (tried the doorknob) and a couple of the detectives stopped him and said something like "Jack, you can't go in there..." but they didn't kick him out.
Sounds like they all knew him.
Your post really gives me no new information.
You are exactly correct though.
I have always been troubled by the FACT that the Dallas Police Department did not see fit to raise their level of vigilance in late November 1963.
Now this image below...that one gives me the creeps. Never mind the autopsy photos, which I have seen a few of.
Congressman Albert Thomas.....winking to LBJ on board Air Force 1, with the dead President below, and the just former (a few minutes ago) First Lady just beside.....
Scum......they are total scum....
That's exactly what the sum total of the evidence proves.
As someone who has taken a lot of photographs of people, I don’t find it particularly creepy since I don’t know if the guy is winking or not...if it were a video file, then yeah. But I have a boatload of images of people with thier eyes doing strange things in the normal course of having their picture taken.
Lady Bird does look kind of inexplicably...happy. Maybe she knew something we didn’t.
Yeah, see. Now this is what Shooter 2.5 and myself are talking about (at least on the previous JFK threads over the years here at FR) where we note that just about every single conspiracist we counter here in the forum is woefully or deliberately ignorant of the basic facts in the case as examined by the Warren Commission and the later House investigation of 1978.
You bring up just this sort of point: Do you know the identity of 'The Umbrella Man', why he was carrying an umbrella in Dallas in November along the parade route, and why he unfurled it?
The man has a name and an identity and was investigated to the HSCA's satisfaction.
Please tell us what you know about him and what role you think that he played, if any, in the murder of JFK.
Go and peruse the images all over the Internet.....you’ll see.
I saw this stuff way before the Internet was even avant garde.
Lady Bird was back then typical....clueless.
Curious, it has taken me just about half a century of living...in order for me to come to the place where I can discern cynicism from naivete.
In those days, women were kept out of the equations, and though stupid, that was how it was done.
Times have changed, and women are now better off, and well represented. Praise God!
I wish everyone who believes Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy would read Case Closed and now Bugliosi’s new book, and THEN try and tell us about their “theories”.
The Kennedy Assasination is the best proof about repeating a lie over and over again and that ANYONE can be brainwashed and/or duped.
Oswald killed Kennedy as sure as OJ killed Ron and Nicole, but many freepers and most of Americans believe otherwise.
I do not need a college degree to tell me that my eyes can see things.
You can tell me about why the umbrella guy was standing there....and the rest, since you know so much about the incident. Mr. Expert.
Some guy just happens to be opening an umbrella in front of the precise spot where a shooter (who was part of a conspiracy, maybe) blew a hole in the head of our President, and you suggest that is perfectly ordinary on a day when it ain’t wasn’t even raining.
Were you a Draft Dodger as well?
I think its plausible that Oswald got off all shots but for sure he was not acting alone. I think the mob and KGB were in cahoots - maybe Johnson too.
Here is an example of someone EXTREMELY intellecutally lazy.
In your first post you say conspiracy......riiiiggghht, as if you actually know something about the case, and are totally dismissive of the poster.
Then you remove all doubt that you know ANYTHING about the case with this ridiculous “theory”.
Proof that many freepers have been duped on this subject. Totally dismissive of all of the evidence, no knowledge of anything AND a theory of the MOB, the KGB, AND the Vice President in an unholy cabal. Substitute a wacked out 9/11 conspiracy and we’re talking DU material here.
When you say riggghtt and plan on being dismissive and smug towards another freeper, you might want to know ANYTHING about what you’re talking about, which you obviously don’t.
Allow me to apologize for you to Shooter 2.5.
I realized that the had to be none other than Bigfoot! This might sound a tad far fetched to some, but think about it for a minute (no longer than a minute otherwise logic might take hold) Bigfoot hangs out in grassy knolls and is always blurry when photographed!
OK, maybe it might sound a little far fetched, but there might be a million dollar screenplay in this somewhere.
I got first dibbs on the copyright!
I agree. The JFK affair was the best example of a corrupt federal government.
Otherwise, YOU can go away.
To answer your question, I served honorably in the USMC.
There are a lot better examples of a corrupt federal government that have been proven. Phantom conspiracies are just examples corrupt mindsets.
At this point, years and conspiracy theories later, wouldn’t the more important question to ask FIRST be, “Why did Jack Ruby kill Oswald?” Working from the last act back to the first might give more answers at this time. Was Ruby just acting out of anger and grief? Was he trying to be the hero who offed the baddest guy around? Answer Ruby’s actions and the answer to the rest of the story becomes clear.
Let me think. Why did Ruby kill Oswald?
Could it be to shut him up?
...but we can’t think that...because that would make this a theory of conspiracy nuts...so it MUST be that Ruby was grief stricken and acted out of some kind of retribution for Mrs. Kennedy’s sake....right?...right??....
I sincerely mean that.
I have not seen the Zapruder film in a number of years, really, ten at least, but probably way more.
The umbrella was down, and then it was up, just immediately before the shots were fired from behind the grassy knoll.
What do you want from me?
Are you demanding that I submit to you a concise report of just what happened on that day in 1963?
I was not even 10 years old back then.
I just read a lot, and I have access to the same things that you likely do.
It does not take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that our President was murdered as a result of a conspiracy.
Conspiracy = breathe together.
If you want to play Mickey the Dunce for all of your life...well then more power to you.
Please, do not ask me to get it for you if you really have any interest in these matters.
JFK was killed as a product of a conspiracy, and the denial of that obvious fact makes anyone who subscribes to that denial, an absolute idiot in my opinion.
Go and do your own homework, and defend your conclusions if they are so contrary to the obvious.
Of course a Dallas strip club operator, with mafia ties, had a secret longing for an east coast blueblooded aristocrat and the presidents wife. In another life Jack Ruby could have actually been someone and ..........
Nope, I think I was right the first time, Ruby shot Oswald to shut him up.
Especially since shooting downward as Oswald is rumored to have done, the target keeps moving in your field of view. Almost impossible to get a single clean shot, much less three.
From the layout of the plaza, the seating of those in the limo, and the direction of travel of the car, there are only a few spots where a shooter would have a clear, unobstructed view of the target, and because of relative motion, it would remain in your sights pretty much fixed for 3-5 seconds...
Short of somebody standing 50 feet in front of the limo and off to the right, about the single best place there is to get a good shot is from the grassy knoll.
Unless of course, he was just really pissed off that day..lol
“Especially since shooting downward as Oswald is rumored to have done, the target keeps moving in your field of view. Almost impossible to get a single clean shot, much less three.”
Shooting from above and behind a target that is moving directly away from you is one of the easiest shots. A car travelling in a straight line would require only a slight raising of the gun barrel. (Close your eyes and imagine it.) Holding the gun steady while working the bolt would speed resighting the target. 3 shots would be a snap.
“Short of somebody standing 50 feet in front of the limo and off to the right, about the single best place there is to get a good shot is from the grassy knoll.”
The car would be moving from left to right as it passed the “grassy knoll” requiring the shooter to lead the target and complicating resighting after working the bolt. This would be a far harder shot.
What do you want from me?"
What I want is the answer to the question I had for you two replies ago.
It wasn't a rhetorical question. I really wanted an answer to what role you think 'The Umbrella Man' played in the JFK assassination.
You seem to think that he was a signal man for the numerous assassins at Dealey Plaza, right? Well, are you or are you not aware that the man was identified and volunteered to give testimony in front of the HSCA and that his identity was confirmed by his family and the people nearest to him in Dealey Plaza at the time of the shooting?
Now honestly, please, step back and ask yourself this:
Do you know what testimony 'The Umbrella Man' gave and what his identity is, or are you simply insisting that he had a role in the assassination based upon your foggy recollection from when you read some conspiracy books when you were 14 that proves to your adult mind without any doubt that there was a conspiracy and that anyone who doesn't see it 'is an absolute idiot'?
I mean, really: If you maintain that the so-called 'Umbrella Man' played a role in the conspiratorial murder of JFK yet you don't even know the first thing about who he was, who's really the 'absolute idiot' here?
Radix, why do you keep telling people not to post who disagree with you?
I think shooter’s and KG9 Kid’s comments are reasonable, as they attempt to back up their opinion with logic, and their comments seem pretty well informed to me.
Yes I think we are thinking the same thing, but very soon, there will be someone here to slap us down with his great big agenda, and tell us we are stupid.
Notice he’s the only one facing the camera.
Like no one on earth ever blinked when a flashbulb goes off.
Yep, sure, riiiight.
Hey, I don’t mind being proved stupid. But they’re going to have to start by proving WHY Ruby killed Oswald, NOT why Oswald acted alone. So far...no...answers..
Wow. Found it.
Maybe this is what Radix believes. ROTFLMAO
He said he didn't know guns. Maybe he knows about umbrellas????
Heck, it makes more sense than Klingon Cloaking Devices on the Knoll.
And some of these Freepers posted before Saturday Night when they’re supposed to be sober. I guess “supposed” is the operative word here.
Check this link. It’s footnoted so you can check further if you wish.
I believe that Ruby told the truth- he just wanted revenge and to save Mrs. Kennedy from having to face her husband’s killer at trial. What else could Ruby have possibly gained from killing Oswald? Money? Prove it.