JFK a new twist

[robert newell]

And none of the so-called conspiracy theories explains why precisely Oswald killed the officer Tippet.

It was his rifle. It was in his place of work. He leaves after the assassination. Kills a police officer and hides. Attempts to kill another police officer when he is caught.

But nah, it wasn't him, it was a frame up.

And there is no way Ruby killing him could have been anything other than a spur of the moment whim. The timing doesn't add up and Ruby's actions ahead of the killing don't indicate he was on any particular time table or in any hurry to be somewhere. It was pure chance he happened to be where he was, when he was and did the deed that spawned a thousand conspiracy theories.

My Ally you certainly learn an awful lot about testimony and evidence from watching those discovery channel programs...

[Ally]

Wow. With witty replies like that, whyever would you need a logical rebuttal. Good thing too as the conspiracy set never seems to have one.

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon..Thank-You for the reply. Brennan refused to identify Oswald on 11-22.

Hi Robert.
According to the Warren Comm. (Ch.IV, p143) Brennan picked Oswald out of a police line-up on the evening of the 22nd, and swore that this was the man who fired the shots from the window.

I do not see Edwards or Fischer describing someone consistent with LHO.

I was using the conclusion published in the report.
"Their (Fischer/Edwards) testimony is of probative value, however, because their limited description is consistent with that of the man who has been found by the Commission, based on other evidence, to have fired the shots from the window".

Anyway-I think Brennan was caught up in the excitement.

I understand Brennan was sure, then unsure, then he apparently gave the reason for the wavering as his concern for his family. He was not comfortable with the idea that he might be the only witness to the shooter, and if this was a conspiracy then other members might victimize his family.
Or words to that effect.

[Wickerman]

Only the final head shot ( explode on impact AR15 machine gun bullet ) came from Hickyes gun along with one or two other strays that impacted with the fence on the grassy knol ( hence the puffs of smoke that witnesses alluded to ) . The Oswald shot from the BD is the one that hit both Kennedy and Connally .. a completely different bullet designed to do exactly what it did ( to pass through a body ).

Another tell tale sign is the fact that three palings from the grassy knol fence were removed by the secret service directly following the assassination ! I wish the Ripper case was this straight forward

moonbegger .

I doubt any shots came from the Grassy Knoll. If you look at the Zapruder film Jackie's head is directly behind Kennedy's, any bullet shot from the Grassy Knoll that passed through Kennedy's head would also hit Jackie. As we know, that never happened.
I'm not talking about the direct line of sight from Zapruder, but a direct angle from the right & behind Zapruder.
Jackie would also have been hit.

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

I really can't be bothered to destroy all of the "evidence" put forward by various of you, trying to convince us all that Lee did it.

Just listen to http://www.blackopradio.com/archives.html and it will all become clear.

What do you have to lose?

[Wickerman]

I really can't be bothered to destroy all of the "evidence" put forward by various of you, trying to convince us all that Lee did it.

Just listen to http://www.blackopradio.com/archives.html and it will all become clear.

What do you have to lose?

I for one would never attempt to convince anyone that Oswald was the shooter. While there are certain details which point to that conclusion, those same details may only point to his complicity in the assassination, but not to the act itself.

My long standing interest in the assassination was not necessarily what we have learned about Oswald, but the more obscure but highly volatile relationship between the Kennedy's, the Mafia & the CIA.

The CIA did collaborate with the Mafia to assassinate Castro. The Mafia did hold Kennedy responsible for the failure to regain Cuba from Castro. It had long been their base of operation until Castro booted them out.
Sam Giancana, Santos Trafficante and Carlos Marcello had untold number of reasons to take out their vengeance on Jack Kennedy.

There is nothing strange about Oswald being viewed as the lone assassin.
This is the interpretation we were intended to accept.
After the Warren Commission concluded its report it was uncovered that arms-length links did exist between Oswald, Ruby and the Mob. However, precise cause & effect has always eluded the investigators.

[Wickerman]

Another Mob figure who is reputed to have played a prominent role is Johnny Rosselli, who was murdered in 1976.

Quote:
Jack Anderson, of the Washington Post, interviewed Roselli just before he was murdered. On 7th September, 1976, the newspaper reported Roselli as saying : "When Oswald was picked up, the underworld conspirators feared he would crack and disclose information that might lead to them. This almost certainly would have brought a massive US crackdown on the Mafia. So Jack Ruby was ordered to eliminate Oswald."

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

Glad to hear it, that you would never try to convince anyone of Oswald's guilt I mean.

I am very depressed about Americans especially, saying either Lee did it or Lee didn't act alone. My view is Lee didn't "act" at all. He shot neither JFK nor Tippit and was exactly what he said he was, a "patsy". I say "I'm depressed about Americans especially" because they just can't seem to see any wrong in their country. "The land of the free" just can't be responsible.

Well, here is the news America, it was responsible, just as it has been for countless other coups across the world. America could and should be a wonderful country. It's people, on the whole, are lovely, polite, friendly people. The trouble is, they're patriotic to a fault. Until they stop being so blindly patriotic, they will (I should say a large minority of them) continue in their misguided belief, that Lee Oswald killed JFK and Tippit because the alternative is unthinkable.

Lee was involved in it all somehow. How? I just don't know. Probably as an undercover operative for the FBI and or CIA. He never knew that he was being set up to take a fall by the real guilty men.

It's such a shame for his two daughters. Today, as I type, is the 50th anniversary of his death. I hope before very many more anniversaries have passed, that he will have been exonerated.

That's just my opinion and no offence was meant towards any of our American friends - honestly.

[Barnaby]

Wow. So many of you think there was a conspiracy, some even claiming that Oswald never fired a shot.

I would have guessed just the opposite from Casebook members who usually are skeptical and value facts over conspiracy.

No one is arguing the Royal conspiracy these days but the CIA, involved! the Commies, must-have-done-it!



Is there an inverse relationship between knowledge in a field and likelihood to believe in conspiracy theories?

[Ally]

Yeah so all those random people on the street who point blank saw Oswald kill Tippit, clearly they were all CIA plants! It was all a set up and all, ALL of those people who witnessed Oswald killing Tippit were just part of a vast, vast conspiracy.

And Oswald pulled a gun and tried to shoot the cop in the movie theater... why now? So his only crime was that he'd snuck into a movie theater without a ticket, and he figures it's worth shooting a cop over?

Yes of course. Us ignorant Americans are the ones with the reality problem.

[robert newell]

I for one would never attempt to convince anyone that Oswald was the shooter. While there are certain details which point to that conclusion, those same details may only point to his complicity in the assassination, but not to the act itself.

My long standing interest in the assassination was not necessarily what we have learned about Oswald, but the more obscure but highly volatile relationship between the Kennedy's, the Mafia & the CIA.

The CIA did collaborate with the Mafia to assassinate Castro. The Mafia did hold Kennedy responsible for the failure to regain Cuba from Castro. It had long been their base of operation until Castro booted them out.
Sam Giancana, Santos Trafficante and Carlos Marcello had untold number of reasons to take out their vengeance on Jack Kennedy.

There is nothing strange about Oswald being viewed as the lone assassin.
This is the interpretation we were intended to accept.
After the Warren Commission concluded its report it was uncovered that arms-length links did exist between Oswald, Ruby and the Mob. However, precise cause & effect has always eluded the investigators.

Hi Jon..Love your opening paragraph. That about sums it up. Maybe LHO complicity or LHO as patsy. I admit that sometimes it is easy for cter's to know Oswald too well and put him on a pedestal of complete innocence just through familiarity.
I am not a crazed 'everything in life is a govt. conspiracy' kinda fella. I've looked at the case many times over the years to prove to myself I wasn't having a post watergate,-the govt.- did it just because it's the govt. reaction.The evidence against Oswald just doesn't hold up. Chain of evidence should count for something, yet even that is missing in the most important of the physical evidence.
Your comment on the relationship between Kennedys,Mob,and CIA. is a good one. People seem to forget the times. The Cuban missile crisis was only a year earlier. Berlin was boiling. S.E. Asia was starting to get going. Big oil was losing millions on tax changes. W.W. two was only 18 years gone for goodness sake. (jtr wasn't even 75 years past!!).
The racist power base and lifestyle in a lot of the US was being defended and people were dying. The ANTI-CASTRO CUBANS, (purposely caps.) were a force. Looking ahead through the decade..assassination was a tool not afraid to be used.
Jon you're a beacon of light in this debate, for your open mindedness. You may not think Oswald innocent but you do not jump to any conclusion without real study. If only more people could just look at this murder with more thought towards the 'innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt' aspect of the law, and not the 'he did it because that what they tell us' view. I swear that if the obviously intelligent and hard working researchers in this group picked one area of the assassination and dedicated their study they would come to a different conclusion than the Warren comm. If not they will probably at least make a more detailed and convincing case than the official mainstream media and the tv shows that just give the official story as all fact.
You know, politics in 1963, both here in the US, and over the world, was very heavy. You needed your big boy or girl pants. JFK was no more to some than a piece to be discarded. Certain people and situations had the motives and means to play the game to their desired end. Which is what I've reached in this post!!!!

[robert newell]

I doubt any shots came from the Grassy Knoll. If you look at the Zapruder film Jackie's head is directly behind Kennedy's, any bullet shot from the Grassy Knoll that passed through Kennedy's head would also hit Jackie. As we know, that never happened.
I'm not talking about the direct line of sight from Zapruder, but a direct angle from the right & behind Zapruder.
Jackie would also have been hit.

Hi Jon-Just saw this. I have to disagree with you here. Jackie was not behind JFK's head at the head shot. At Z-312,313.ect..she was just not in the line of fire of a shot from the right front. I'm talking from the overpass all the way east down the picket fence area.
In a Discovery channel t.v. program 6'th floor museum curator, Gary Mack wrongly places Jackie in the limo. An error he knew quite well he commited. He was called out on it, as he knows better. I hope your not using this program as evidence......Thanks, Robert

[robert newell]

I doubt any shots came from the Grassy Knoll. If you look at the Zapruder film Jackie's head is directly behind Kennedy's, any bullet shot from the Grassy Knoll that passed through Kennedy's head would also hit Jackie. As we know, that never happened.
I'm not talking about the direct line of sight from Zapruder, but a direct angle from the right & behind Zapruder.
Jackie would also have been hit.

Hi Jon ...one more from oppisite of head shot.

[robert newell]

Wow. With witty replies like that, whyever would you need a logical rebuttal. Good thing too as the conspiracy set never seems to have one.

Hi Ally..I did not mean to be curt with my answer. I have no right to address you in that manner. Sorry. ...Robert

[Wickerman]

My view is Lee didn't "act" at all. He shot neither JFK nor Tippit and was exactly what he said he was, a "patsy".

We cannot forget gunshot residue was identified on his hands. And, given the eyewitness evidence concerning the murder of Officer Tippit, the balance of probability is that he shot the officer.

He is definitely tied to the rifle, and apparently had assembled and supplied the rifle, but as his fingerprints were not found on the grip, trigger or stock, consistent with him firing the rifle, then it cannot be established that he did.

And, it was strongly believed at the time that this kind of weapon would have definitely expelled a great amount of gunshot residue when fired. It was fully expected that gunshot residue should be found on the cheek of the assassin. Oswalds cheek tested clean.

Its just not conclusive for him to be the assassin.

Jack Ruby's encounter with Oswald comes across as pure chance. Well yes, of course, it will always be pure chance, but that encounter in the underground garage was not his first attempt to get to Oswald.

Ruby previously tried to walk straight into the interview room while a guard was standing outside the door, and Oswald was alone. As it happens all Ruby managed to do was grasp the door handle, the officer stepped across his path, so Ruby turned away.
So it does seem apparent that Jack Ruby was intent on getting up close to Oswald for some reason.