I dearly hope that some of the photos and videotape confiscated by the feds that day remain in existence and will be released when the rest of the file becomes public. Imagine if the Zapruder film had been confiscated as well? Sure, a gunshot from the back causes his head to go backwards - what a bunch of crap?
The Warrren Commision mambers had close ties to the government? It was a government investigation.
It would be better to post the entire Warren Commission findings that this BS.
I guess you never realized that there were two police officers ON the overpass, one on each side accompanied by a group of railroad workers from the yard watching the procession. Not to mentioned that no trajectory could have hit the President at that angle. The limo had one of those new fangled inventions called a windshield.
For later reading.
It's nice to be able to see some contemporaneous writing about all the lying crap that was going on back then in order to frame Oswald. I particularly liked the parts about the police radio stating that the initial shots came from the overpass,
I have the recordings. I can assure you that they say no such thing.
the gun identity switch,
There is no switch.
the paraffin test,
Paraffin tests are not certain. Did you know that they had an agent fire the same gun three times and did a paraffin test on him and it came up negative too?
and the release of Oswald's description prior to the cop being killed.
From an eyewitness that saw him shooting from the book depository. That's evidence for his guilt, not for some kind of frame.
The rational thinker versus the paranoid
Presented with the same evidence for a mystery, the rational thinker and the paranoid respond very differently.
The rational thinker: |
The paranoid: |
1. Checks the evidence carefully and doesnt rely on uncertain evidence |
1. Grabs onto a few pieces of evidence and defends them inflexibly. |
2. Doesnt care which evidence he must let go. |
2. Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and wont let go. |
3. Seeks a realistic answer in simple and familiar processes. |
3. Invokes complex, unrealistic scenarios controlled by powerful forces behind the scenes. |
4. Accepts only what he can critically assess (falsifiable ideas). |
4. Deals in explanations that can never be critically assessed (unfalsifiable theories). |
5. Is willing to live with unresolved explanations for long periods. |
5. Demands quick, even immediate explanations. |
6. Accepts the roles of chance and human foibles. |
6. Invents scenarios when nothing ever goes wrong. |
7. Uses same rational approach in the rest of his life. |
7. Approaches many other events in the same irrational, paranoid way. (i.e., both people are consistent across their lives.) |
8. Finds empowering explanations. |
8. Feels powerless before these huge forces (victims). |
9. Accepts all demonstrated evidence. |
9. Will not face evidence that destroys his theory. |
10. Is willing to live with some fraction of unexplained or contradictory evidence. |
10. Insists on fitting everything into his explanation, often by explaining difficult items as further evidence of conspiracy. |
11. Tries to keep everything in proportion. |
11. Often seizes single pieces of evidence and blows them out of proportion. |
12. Will change ideas a new evidence emerges. |
12. Sticks to preconceived notion regardless of new evidence. |
13. Open, flexible, empowered, strong. |
13. Preconceived, rigid, victimlike, cowardly. |
I can tell you don't live in Dallas. Every once in a while, a publication will assign some pup reporters to investigate the JFK assassination. Reporters that believe the conspiracy nonsense. After they investigate, it always the same. A short little byline where the reporter realizes that Oswald acted alone. The last major publication I read where the editors tried to believe in a conspiracy was the Texas Monthly in it's 35th anniversary edition. The reporters were associate editor Michael Hall and assistant editor Pamela Colloff. They both realized through their investigations that Oswald acted alone.
No mass circulation publications? Another lie in your article.
There is anamosity between most competant Law Enforcement agencies and the FBI. There is no collusion between them although management cannot be trusted. However street cops and agents would talk if things were "wrong".
Attribute most of the problems to the incompetance of the FBI - ala ANTHRAX. The Bureau LOST!, Yes LOST Kennedy's brain. It was to be housed at the Smithsonian, but alas, the Bureau LOST EVIDENCE. Ah, why go on. Who actually killed Kennedy? For my money, it was the MOB. As Sam Giancana said, I should have taken out Bobby". What happened tpo the Organized Crime efforts of the Federal Gov't? The Bureau says they destroyed it - in essence, who is going to refute them?
SEPTEMBER 6, 1964 !!!
I had no idea that people were catching on to the whole 'Oswald shot Kennedy all by himself' fraud so quickly.
With all the evidence of fraud and corruption that has come up since then, it is amazing to find anybody who still believes that Oswald was the lone assassin.
A couple of days ago I watched a prominent LBJ biographer on TV. He has been studying the released phone conversations of LBJ and is extremely knowledgeable. He said that even Johnson was aware right from the git-go that things could not have happened the way the propagandists were spinning them. He knew that others were involved. He made a clutch decision to go along with the spin because he did not wish to undermine the public's confidence in their government and, more importantly, he did not want to upset foreign relations with the Soviets.