Author Topic: conspiracy theory on history channel..  (Read 3406 times)

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #90 on: November 28, 2004, 04:36:22 AM »
How many have been to Dealy Plaza?  Ive watched plenty of stuff on the assassination, but actually going to Dealy raised the most doubt for me about the lone gunmen theory. You can stand at the window directly to the right of Oswalds position. I dont get why he didnt shoot the President as he came down the street ( dont know it off the top of my head) towards the school book depository. The president would have been facing Oswald for an extremely easy shot. He could have thrown the rifle out the window and hit thr President as he turned to Oswalds right directly below. It just didnt make sense to me to take the shot where he did. But mybe he was having second thoughts, I dunno.

  Standing behind the fence at the grassy knoll raised some serious doubts as well. Its a hell of a lot closer to the street than it appears on TV. That being said, that History channel show seemed very well done and convincing, so im still riding the fence on the whole thing.

Offline Leslie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2212
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #91 on: November 28, 2004, 06:32:31 AM »
I've been to Dealy Plaza, the whole area is much smaller than it appears in the film.  There are trees blocking the area directly below, though they maybe weren't as big then as they were when I was there.   Branches hid much of the view except for the angle downhill where the shots were taken.

The grassy knoll fence is about 50 feet from the street IIRC.  There is a storm drain opening in the street there directly below the fence as well.

All this is in a compact area, and any shot from any of these locations would have been a close quarter shot.

The decision to not use the bubble top was a last minute thing as I recall from documentaries, and so was the change in route.  Pres. Kennedy was warned ahead of time not to go to Dallas, but he went anyway under assurances he was loved by the people of Dallas.  I don't know if JFK or his political advisors wanted the top removed, but that turned out to be a tragedy.

The route was announced ahead of time to the public, so there is some question of it being a conspiracy.  I think Oswald took advantage of that, though it's possible he was not alone.  We'll never know.



Les

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #92 on: November 28, 2004, 07:34:01 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Slash27
How many have been to Dealy Plaza?  Ive watched plenty of stuff on the assassination, but actually going to Dealy raised the most doubt for me about the lone gunmen theory. You can stand at the window directly to the right of Oswalds position. I dont get why he didnt shoot the President as he came down the street ( dont know it off the top of my head) towards the school book depository. The president would have been facing Oswald for an extremely easy shot. He could have thrown the rifle out the window and hit thr President as he turned to Oswalds right directly below. It just didnt make sense to me to take the shot where he did. But mybe he was having second thoughts, I dunno.

  Standing behind the fence at the grassy knoll raised some serious doubts as well. Its a hell of a lot closer to the street than it appears on TV. That being said, that History channel show seemed very well done and convincing, so im still riding the fence on the whole thing.


Why not shoot him in the face?

Simple, he would far more likely to be spotted by the motorcade if he tried position himself to fire at it from the front.  Naturally far more eyes would be looking forward than back.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2004, 07:36:50 AM by GRUNHERZ »

Offline Shuckins

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3412
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #93 on: November 28, 2004, 08:25:07 AM »
Slash,

Oswald probably took the going away shot because it offered an unobstructed view of the President.  He would not have got such a view prior to that as the President came down the street toward the plaza.

Also, this view offered an almost perfect "going away" shot which, at that distance, required the shooter to use a mimimum of "lead" in order to hit the target.  Since he was shooting from a rest, Oswald had a far less difficult shot than many non-shooting laymen have assumed.

I have always suspected that much of the confusion which has led to the "second gunman" theories was the number of echos that undoubtedly resulted from all the high-rise buildings, the overpass, and the knoll.  To those unused to such things, it must have seemed that there were gunmen everywhere.  If you've never experienced it, you would not believe how many echos can result from firing a high-powered rifle in an open field bordered by trees.

Having said that, spectators standing near a rifle when it goes off could not mistake it for an echo.  Many of the closest spectators immediately pointed to the window of the school book depository as the source of the shots.  Those standing furthest from the depository were the most likely to be confused by the echos, at least in my opinion.

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #94 on: November 28, 2004, 09:20:39 AM »
Simple, he would far more likely to be spotted by the motorcade if he tried position himself to fire at it from the front. Naturally far more eyes would be looking forward than back.

Maybe so.




If you've never experienced it, you would not believe how many echos can result from firing a high-powered rifle in an open field bordered by trees.

Are you kidding me? Im from Texas:rolleyes: ...............:D

 

  Heat  with Pacino and Deniro captured what high powered rifles going off surrounded by tall buildings must sound like. Not that Ive been in urban combat, just saying though.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #95 on: November 28, 2004, 09:59:51 AM »
guys... oswald worked at the book depository... he could safely go there with a package and get away with it...  I bet he had been up in that window smoking cigs and looking down at cars that went by there and thought... "I bet I could hit anyone in the head with the old 6.5 from here... might go proactice a little with the scope tho.."

It was a pretty easy shot.    I have known lefties that used bolt action rifles... they seemed to work em as fast as I did.

The bullet was extremely flattened from the base to about half way up...  I have seen better looking bullets that struck dirt banks and rocks at higher velocities.

face it... he did it.   I don't know why and don;t know it he was the only one in on it but he did the shooting all by himself.


lazs

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #96 on: November 28, 2004, 10:04:41 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Vulcan
Yes, thats right, I'm saying Oswald was having a conspiracy with himself :rolleyes: in conspiring to shoot faster than the pleebs of the world say he can.

Perhaps a little http://www.dictionary.com might be a wise move for you.

  I cant believe the warren commission didnt think of this.

  Take a pumpkin at 88 yards.  Get your bolt action rifle.  Load the chamber aim and fire, reload the chamber via the bolt, aim, fire, reload the chamber, aim fire.  From the first fire to the last you have 7 seconds.  The commission stated that a minimum of 1.5 seconds is required to actuate the bolt.  That is 3 seconds for bolt and 4 seconds for positioning the gun and aiming.  
 2 seconds per shot for aiming at a moving target.

 Lets add 1 shot ...4.5 seconds for bolt  2.5 seconds for aiming, thats 2.5 divided by 3.    Thats .833 seconds for positioning the gun and aiming at a moving target at 88 yards throguh oak tree foilage at the last 2 shots.

Hmmm, maybe the warren commission did think of this.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2004, 11:18:27 AM by WhiteHawk »

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #97 on: November 28, 2004, 11:09:44 AM »
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/abrahamzapruderfilm.htm

Well, here is a link that shows the critical head shot.  To my eye, the shot came from the front right.  This was not the magic bullet, just an ordinary one from a high powered rifle.  
  Ive just read a very compelling argument about how the magic bullet was perfectly plausable, the guy went throgh a very scientific and beleiveable argument,  to systematically eliminate any other possibility outside of the Single bullet theory.
  The 2 men were aligned properly for the bullet to exit kennedys throat and enter connally without nearly as dramatic a zig zag as the conspiracy kooks write.  The timing anomaly was not addresed, i dont really understand it myself.  
  I still have problems with it tho.
  1) the author took the SBT and worked from there.  Took the SBT and made it fit the evidence as opposed to taking the eveidence and concluding the SBT.  Kind of like working a maze from the finish to the start.  (does it make a difference, i dont know).
  2)  Addressed the issue of Kennedys back wound being lower than his neck wound by syaing, 'there would have had to be a gunman on the trunk, therefore thats not possible'  even though, he used the 'bullets do amazing things' argument to bridge the gaps in his proof of the SBT.  In other words, bullets do amazing things when conforms to the official story. If it doesnt reinforce the official story, even a fool can see that that is impossible.
  3) Didnt address the botched autopsy that couldve put the whole issue to rest.  i.e.  bullet paths through the body, trjectory analysis, etc.

  For what it is worth, take a look at the film and tell me what you think.

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9891
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #98 on: November 28, 2004, 12:26:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
Thats .833 seconds for positioning the gun and aiming at a moving target at 88 yards throguh oak tree foilage at the last 2 shots.

Hmmm, maybe the warren commission did think of this.


Wow, nearly a full second to acquire and aim :rolleyes:  thats impossible to do for a trained marine marksmen huh.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #99 on: November 28, 2004, 12:36:22 PM »
vulcan and wh... get over it... it is not impossible.  You can't eliminate thje obvious... that oswald fired his rifle from the book depository window and made a few decent shots and one really crappy one.... bout like a day out shooting.  

You guys ever go out and shoot?  Us guys that shoot a lot don't see anything atr all strange about it...    

lazs

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #100 on: November 28, 2004, 01:02:20 PM »
Lazs..Click the headshot link above and tell me that you believe that   the fatal shot came from the back.  Say it in black and white.
  We see the same pics, but we see two different things. An honest and incurable disagreement.
  Then there is no point in arguing the SBT, Oswald may very well have shot the majic bullet, somebody else, in my humble opinion, shot the fatal headshot.  There is no way, in my eyes, that that shot came from the back.

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #101 on: November 28, 2004, 01:05:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Vulcan
Wow, nearly a full second to acquire and aim :rolleyes:  thats impossible to do for a trained marine marksmen huh.


Here in the USA vulcan, we dont go by impossible we go by reasonable doubt.  
 tell me Vulcan, how many shots from a bolt action rifle can you get off in 7 seconds.  45? 50? 100?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2004, 01:08:11 PM by WhiteHawk »

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #102 on: November 28, 2004, 01:17:50 PM »
Wh... I don't see what you are talking about?  Are you saying that a shot allways forces a person to move away from the impact?   That is just wrong.   guys get hit with .50 cals and 2mm cannon rounds and shotgun slugs and fall forward toward the impact.  

Yes... I am saying in black and white that the rounds came from the 3rd floor of the depository from a 6.5 carcano and that someone who was either oswald or his twin fired the shots... his co workers heard not only the shots but the empty brass hitting the floor above them.   Oswald fired one carefully aimed "couldn't miss" shot and then two fairly hasty other shots... one went wild and one hit the mark... about average shooting.

How much have you shot rifles?   I am not a good rifle shot but I am pretty sure I could duplicate it.... Hell... bet I could get 2 out of three hits with an off the shelf .357 or .44 mag revolver.

Nothing mysterious about the conclussions of the commission that studied the shyooting... everything was possible and the other possibilities were extremely unlikely and without any tangible proof.

Anything could have happened but there is a 99% chance that it happened exactly the way the warren commision and all the data shows it happened.

You are welcome to your theory.... If you voice it tho.... expect people to snicker at it behind your back.... or... in my case... "in black and white".

lazs

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #103 on: November 28, 2004, 03:19:36 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Wh... I don't see what you are talking about?  Are you saying that a shot allways forces a person to move away from the impact?   That is just wrong.   guys get hit with .50 cals and 2mm cannon rounds and shotgun slugs and fall forward toward the impact.  

lazs


Oh, so thats the problem.  I have never shot a person in the head.  All the objects that I have shot have always moved away from the rifle barrel, not towards it.  Pumpkins, cans, mailboxes, milkjugs etc.  
But, just to make things clear for me, you are saying that kennedys head moved towards the gunshot? And that is what usually happens when a person is shot?  Just the opposite of pool ball physics?
  To my 'inexperienced in gun physics' eyes, I saw Kennedys head jerk viciously to the rear left as the right front of his head exploded.  
  My bad, his head jerked viciously TOWARDS the shooter, as is usually the case in people shootings.  Thnx.  I wish the officials would have pointed this out, it could have saved a buttload of mass confusion. Im so embarrassed.:(

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
conspiracy theory on history channel..
« Reply #104 on: November 28, 2004, 03:32:41 PM »
Do pool balls have muscles in them?