JFK assassination expert: Lee Harvey Oswald lone gunman theory is ‘bulls–t’

#253
#253
Rasputin_Vol said:
I don't know if I believe him, either. I would say that he knows a lot of details and was likely involved in some way, but I'm skeptical that he was the one that gave the kill shot. I'm on the fence between Files or Charles Haralson (one of the Tramps).
Click to expand...
Good grief.
Do you understand the difference between propaganda and actual facts?
 
#256
#256
Rasputin_Vol said:
I don't know if I believe him, either. I would say that he knows a lot of details and was likely involved in some way, but I'm skeptical that he was the one that gave the kill shot. I'm on the fence between Files or Charles Haralson (one of the Tramps).
Click to expand...
What about the photos of Billy Lovelady in the doorway of the TSBT that were supposedly doctored up? Some people claim that Oswald was in the doorway as the motorcade went by. I'm not sure if that has ever been verified though or not.
 
#257
#257
lostsheep said:
Interested to get your thoughts after reading:

JFK Gunshot wound dynamics
Click to expand...
Look, first off, this is a .gov link you are posting, so obviously it is going to have a govt narrative. Second, it is building its case about the shots based on frames of the edited Zapruder film.

Note that if |Fx|≈|Fσ| (i.e., the force of the projectile collision is close to the bone ultimate strength), it is easily shown that (10) and (11) respectively reduce to V=v2 (i.e., the bone plug is not moved beyond its initial speed before impact) and |Jx|=m1(v1−v2)≡p1, where p1 is the momentum of the projectile. In this case, the collision would then be a perfectly inelastic collision, and the total incoming momentum of the projectile p1 would be completely transferred to the skull and head. According to the above model, a projectile impulse Jx will surpass the bone's ultimate strength and thus fracture the bone (although not necessarily perforating it) when Jx−Jσ≥0, that is
Click to expand...

What is this saying?
 
#258
#258
RDU VOL#14 said:
I’ve heard stuff about that. Not sure I completely buy into the notion that GHWB was a big enough player at that time.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that (necessarily). I'm just pointing out the list of people Tucker mentioned at the end of that tweet that would have had knowledge of this information. GHWB was CIA Director at the time of the Church Committee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and RDU VOL#14
#259
#259
Toucan Sam said:
What about the photos of Billy Lovelady in the doorway of the TSBT that were supposedly doctored up? Some people claim that Oswald was in the doorway as the motorcade went by. I'm not sure if that has ever been verified though or not.
Click to expand...
I've seen that photo, but I still think Oswald was in the break room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toucan Sam
#260
#260
Rasputin_Vol said:
Look, first off, this is a .gov link you are posting, so obviously it is going to have a govt narrative. Second, it is building its case about the shots based on frames of the edited Zapruder film.



What is this saying?
Click to expand...
Haha. Got you. So you're not even going to read because it's presented by the "deep state."
Yet, you swallow up Oliver Stone's theories. Makes sense!!
 
#261
#261
lostsheep said:
Haha. Got you. So you're not even going to read because it's presented by the "deep state."
Yet, you swallow up Oliver Stone's theories. Makes sense!!
Click to expand...
I did read some of that and I posted a quote from the article. You haven't told me what the highlighted is saying, nor have you told me what is the significance/difference of an entry/exit wound.

Also, even without Oliver Stone, there are enough holes in the narrative to rule out the lone gunman theory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#262
#262
lostsheep said:
Haha. Got you. So you're not even going to read because it's presented by the "deep state."
Yet, you swallow up Oliver Stone's theories. Makes sense!!
Click to expand...

Do you or have you ever hunted ? There’s a reason why it’s hard to not understand back and to the left if you have .
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#264
#264
0nelilreb said:
Do you or have you ever hunted ? There’s a reason why it’s hard to not understand back and to the left if you have .
Click to expand...
The fact that your belief hinges on the head moving "back and to the left" shows how little research you've actually done on the topic.
 
#265
#265
Rasputin_Vol said:
I did read some of that and I posted a quote from the article. You haven't told me what the highlighted is saying, nor have you told me what is the significance/difference of an entry/exit wound.

Also, even without Oliver Stone, there are enough holes in the narrative to rule out the lone gunman theory.
Click to expand...
So, to make this easier for you...fast forward to the end of the heavily researched report and read the conclusion.
 
#266
#266
I think the only way to come to the conclusion that LHO was alone firing shots is to mentally work backwards. To swallow the gov line 100% and then mentally justify it as best you can using cognitive dissonance, or just completely ignoring facts.

Nobody in their right mind, when presented all of the available (public) information that has ever been a hunter or avid shooter would look at the available evidence and come to the conclusion that JFK was shot and killed by LHO firing 2 or 3 times from his vantagepoint way back behind the vehicle. Period. Absent the mindset already tainted by the government, a logical person applying rigid scientific analysis of what took place would never, ever, in their right mind conclude he was only shot from behind.

For fecks sake man...there isnt even an exit wound on the front of his head OR neck...exit wounds are ALWAYS larger than entrance wounds in mammals...bit there is an entrance wound above JFKs right eye as well as statements from the Drs who first examined the body (before the feds threatened, pushed them away ètc) that he died from a massive chunk of skull blown out the back of his head. ANY PROJECTILE coming from behind that blew a big chunk out the back of his head would have blown half his face off into the frontseat of the damn car. That is not debatable. It is physics. Nobody who kills things with a rifle could come to the BS conclusion that the government did. I just do not see how they could.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey X, AM64 and RDU VOL#14
#267
#267
marcusluvsvols said:
For fecks sake man...there isnt even an exit wound on the front of his head OR neck...exit wounds are ALWAYS larger than entrance wounds in mammals...bit there is an entrance wound above JFKs right eye as well as statements from the Drs who first examined the body (before the feds threatened, pushed them away ètc) that he died from a massive chunk of skull blown out the back of his head. ANY PROJECTILE coming from behind that blew a big chunk out the back of his head would have blown half his face off into the frontseat of the damn car. That is not debatable. It is physics. Nobody who kills things with a rifle could come to the BS conclusion that the government did. I just do not see how they could.
Click to expand...
Uhh ohh @lostsheep ...
 
#268
#268
Ras you have seen the Drs statement also that cause of death was a massive chunk of skull blown out the back of his head right?
 
#269
#269
According to Trump, Ted Cruz's pappy was involved with killing JFK. If Trump said it, it must be true, right?
 
#270
#270
Rasputin_Vol said:
Uhh ohh @lostsheep ...
Click to expand...
No "Uhhh ohhh" for me, Ras.

I've been down the same rabbit holes you boys are going down. I believed it all as well. Read all the conspiracy theories. Listened to the podcasts, so on and so forth. However....at some point, I realized it takes a bigger leap of faith to believe the conspiracy BS than it does the actual truth. Unfortunately, most conspiracy minded folk look for things to strengthen their own opinions, regardless of the weakness of the citations they cite.

We all want to shoot it down due to inconsistencies between the doctors at Parkland and Dr. Humes at Bethesda, and because many people wanted JFK dead. However, the existence of these things doesn't mean LHO didn't do it.

I'll say it again...show me well researched proof of a shooter from the grassy knoll...or the driver of the limo shooting him...or a man popping out of the manhole to shoot him...or any other nonsense you can come up with and I'll do more due diligence. Until then, I'd recommend you guys look at the facts.
 
#272
#272
lostsheep said:
I'll say it again...show me well researched proof of a shooter from the grassy knoll...or the driver of the limo shooting him...or a man popping out of the manhole to shoot him...or any other nonsense you can come up with and I'll do more due diligence. Until then, I'd recommend you guys look at the facts.
Click to expand...
The (edited) Zapruder film shows it.
 
#273
#273
lostsheep said:
I'll say it again...show me well researched proof of a shooter from the grassy knoll...or the driver of the limo shooting him...or a man popping out of the manhole to shoot him...or any other nonsense you can come up with and I'll do more due diligence. Until then, I'd recommend you guys look at the facts.
Click to expand...
The driver didn't shoot him, but there is a question about why he slowed the car down when the shots started ringing out.

And if there was a guy in the manhole/storm drain (Jack Lawrence), I doubt he fired a shot. I am not certain I can buy that theory without more evidence.

There is no need to get too deep in the weeds and fall into a rabbit hole when there is plenty of known evidence available that makes this case leaky and no where near airtight against Oswald.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#274
#274
Rasputin_Vol said:
The driver didn't shoot him, but there is a question about why he slowed the car down when the shots started ringing out.

And if there was a guy in the manhole/storm drain (Jack Lawrence), I doubt he fired a shot. I am not certain I can buy that theory without more evidence.

There is no need to get too deep in the weeds and fall into a rabbit hole when there is plenty of known evidence available that makes this case leaky and no where near airtight against Oswald.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree, but that's JMO. Either way, makes for good reading and discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top