[Politically Incorrect]

Did anyone else watch ABC's news special about the death of JFK? It was very informative about the motive behind Oswald and showing why conspiracy theories don't stand up against the evidence of LHO being the lone shooter.

Dale Myers constructed Delany Plaza in a 3D program to such detail and showed how the shooting happened. It's an interesting look at what happened on that fateful day. His website is below with some animation and explanations.

www.jfkfiles.com

I grew up with the belief that there was a conspiracy, but the more I've looked into it, the more I believe that Oswald was a nut who was looking for some notoriety.

[Dave T]

So what you're saying is Peter Jennings, the leftest Canadian, is the authority on this and we should believe him?????????????????

I never believed in any conspiracy theories until watching "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" on the History Channel for three nights. There are so many people who have seen things and testified to things that were ignored by the "officials" that I now believe we experienced a coup d'etat in November of 1963. As far as I'm concerned Johnson was behind it, or at least involved in it.

It's obvious you don't agree, so no point arguing about it. We just aren't on the same page on this.

[DeputyVaughn]

"I wonder why the TV networks are doing this all of a sudden?"

Could it be that the 40th aniversary of the shooting is tomorrow?

Scott

[J Miller]

I watched it. I thought it was very well done. I used to be one of the conspiracy theorists, but in recent years, and after watching the computer simulations based on the Zapruder films I no longer believe in the conspiracy idea. At just under 90 yards in the time alloted I could have made those shots. It's just not that hard. Especially when you see that the limo was moving away from the shooter in virtually a straight line. Easy shots.

Peter Jennings is not even part of the equasion. He's just a talking head hired to narrate the program.

I was alive and in grade school when Kennedy was killed. I've lived through all the terror, emotions, and anger that this caused. I watched the funeral procession in Washington DC all day long in 1963 because the Catholic school I went too closed that day. I watched the news reports of Lee Harvy Oswold being killed.
I remember the Warren Commision hearings.
There is no conspiracy. Just an insignificant wacko who killed the most liked and carismatic president we had.

Yes, it's the 40th anniversary of JFK's death, and so the media and every one else is going to stir it up again. This assination of John Kennedy is the most vividly memorible occurance in many Americans eyes. It will not die, till everyone who remembers what happened in November of '63 is gone.

J

[Hkmp5sd]

I watched it and it was pretty good. As with everything, the media screws up at least a couple of facts. For a few years now, I've been converted to the Oswald acted alone side. No conspiracy. Want proof, read Case Closed.

[TheeBadOne]

What J Miller said.

[TheEgg]

I don't know if there was a conspiracy or not.

That said, the ABC show was worthless. It obviously started out with the contention that LHO was the lone shooter, and presented only evidence that supported that theory, and gave VERY short shrift to other views. IIRC, only in the last 1/2 hour did they interview anyone who supported the conspiracy theory, and they cherry-picked the interviews to make them seem like ill-informed nuts.

This was NOT good reporting -- but hey, it was ABC, what did I expect?

[Mike Irwin]

"Peter Jennings is not even part of the equasion..."

I watched a show last night on PBS about the TV coverage of the assassination, and how that event changed American perceptions of TV's place in reporting the news...

They showed video clips of people who were reporting the story from Dallas at various points...

Peter Jennings, Dan Rather, Rober McNeill, Jim Lehrer, Bob Schiffer, and a bunch of others whose names are now, or were, faily well known.

[son of a gun]

Heres a good article on Dale Myers in the Detroit Free Press, if you question his motivation.

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/jfk20_20031120.htm

[TheOtherOne]

I just liked how it tore apart the lies in the JFK film by Oliver Stone and pointed out the fact that the majority of Americans will believe everything they see in movies. Of course, they were wanting us to believe everything we saw on that TV show too... but the point was still made.

[Cactus]

Originally posted by Dave T:
I never believed in any conspiracy theories until watching "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" on the History Channel for three nights.

What's to say that the History Channel didn't make up things? It's not just the government that is capable of lying.

The thing on "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" that I found to be totally UNBELEIVABLE that conspiracy buffs site as proof that it was a conspiracy, is the "photo" of the soldier and the the "second gunman". After this "soldier" came forward, many years after the event, and said he saw the second gunman, someone analyzed this photo and "found" him. If you have seen a copy of the actual photo, it was a Polaroid taken by someone at least 50 yards away on the opposite side of the plaza. The photo was taken of Kennedy's limo as it passed by. Anyone familier with Polaroid personal cameras, knows that the quality of the image is poor to begin with. The photo "experts" then analyzed the photo pixel by pixel to find the second gunman. They found images made up of 2 to 5 pixels and traced lines around them and "proved" that the soldier and the second gunman was there. One big white smudge was even said to be the smoke from the fired gun. This "smoke" pretty much covered the head of the "shooter" so I guess he must have been using a black powder rifle!

Another problem I have with this photo is that the soldier is alive to tell about it. If this soldier was actually there standing just feet away from the shooter, and known to be there by the shooter and his companion, why was this soldier allowed to live? If the Kennedy assasination were a conspiracy, it required a large number of people to carry out it and the following coverup. These conspirators would allow their intricately planned plot to be discovered by one single soldier? If the government at the highest levels was involved in the plot, as many believe, why was this soldier not shipped out to Viet Nam and "killed" in enemy action if they were unable to kill him at the plaza?

Originally posted by SaxonPig:
Discovery did same thing on Wed with cooked facts and altered history trying to prove Oswald was killer and acted alone. They claimed 8 second of shooting when for 40 years everyone, even lone gunman people, have said it was 6 second. All lies. I wonder why the TV networks are doing this all of a sudden?

The 8 second time frame is based on the Zapruder film. ABC and Discovery are NOT the first to use this figure. Gerald Posner in his book "Case Closed" uses it as well. It is now pretty common belief that Oswald's first shot missed. This is supported by the Zapruder film that shows Gov. Connolly and others turning to look behind them. If you take the frame number at this reaction, and the frame number at the killing shot to Kennedy's head, it works out to be around 8+ seconds between the first and third shots. The 6 second figure was based on the assumption that the shot that wounded Kennedy was the first shot.

Actually it would work to the advantage of TV networks and other journalists to "prove" that it was a plot. The journalist that could prove this would be rich and famous. Just look what Watergate did for Woodward and Bernstein. Proving a plot against Kennedy would make Watergate look like the second rate burglary Nixon proclaimed it.

Was Oswald the "lone gunman"? Over the years my opinion has changed to believe that he was. The recent computer analysis done in the past 10 years has convinced me that the shots were possible. Did Oswald work alone? I don't know but I suspect he did.

The simple fact that there are so many different conspiracy theories, instead of many different conspiracy buffs coming to the same conclusion, tends to support the idea that most of the theoriests are looking to make money on books and to get their 15 minutes of fame. You would also think that after 40 years, you would have at least ONE death bed confession!

[Sergeant Bob]

If you take the frame number at this reaction, and the frame number at the killing shot to Kennedy's head, it works out to be around 8+ seconds between the first and third shots. The 6 second figure was based on the assumption that the shot that wounded Kennedy was the first shot.
Many say Oswald had only 6 seconds (or 8) to fire 3 shots. The clock doesn't really start until he fires the first shot.
Actually, he had 6 or 8 seconds to fire two shots.
Just a matter of perspective

[bogie]

With a military mauser, and a bit of fumbling (with practice I could go faster), I can trip the trigger on an empty chamber and cycle the bolt three times in seven seconds. I think I could get it under five, and shooting from a supported position, I think I'd have a decent chance of hitting a trashcan size target at 100 yards. I think the head shot was luck.

[TheeBadOne]

Actually, he had 6 or 8 seconds to fire two shots.
:cool:

[Don Galt]

That show wallowed in lameness.

And no, it did not debunk any conspiracy theories--- it just presented the warren commision report with some computer simulations.

Those simulations were obviously finagled to make them work... they were not "exact recreations of the zapruder film" -- especially since one of the shots happened while zapruder's view was blocked by the street sign.

I don't consider presenting the lone gunman theory, assuming its true, and then going on and on trying to justify it, as debunking anything.

But to the average american (who does not post to this board!) and is not thinking critically or very well informed, it would seem to wrap things up very nicely, wouldn't it?

Just like all good propaganda.

The media is not just the leftist mouthpiece, it is also the government's mouthpiece.

Remember, no mass media can stay in existance without the government's consent. The FCC has them in control. Defacto censorhip.

That's why the FCC is yet another government agency we'd be better without. You want to reduce the size of government and cut taxes right? Well, there's a big chunk fo the budget that does nothing but make cable and broadcast TV more expensive and of lower quality--- and it quashes anyone who might be too politically incorrect.

[Don Galt]

Hell with a few minutes, I could conclusively prove with a computer simulation that it was Oleg Volk, standing on the Grassy Knoll with a Phased-plasma rifle in the forty watt range.

[BamBam]

ABC's JFK Assassination Special !!!!!!!!

Featuring:
- Up With People
- Don Rickles
- The Ernie Flatt Dancers
- Glenn Campbell
- Pink Lady and Jeff
- Rich Little
- Telly Savalis
- and The Warren Commission!

Ladies and Gentelmen; your host.....Jim Neibors!!!

[Cactus]

The conspiracy theorists will never be satisfied that Oswald killed Kennedy. Unlike on CSI, there are almost ALWAYS mistakes and unexplainable circumstances in murder investigations. Just ask O.J. Simpson, these mistakes made him a free man.

Proving that Oswald killed Kennedy, without ANY doubt, is impossible. No matter how much computer simulation, autopsy reports, etc. you come up with, there are always going to be doubters. Isn't it interesting though, that none of the conspiracy buffs have come up with a simulation based on the Zapruder film, showing their favorite conspiracy, that can stand up to scrutiny? Nor have any of them shown that the simulations, showing the shots were fired from the sixth floor, are flawed.

When all else fails, the doubters always have the old reliable standby that the government collected the evidence and they are lying. And anyone who casts doubt on their favorite conspiracy theory is obviously just a shill for the government and part of the coverup.

After all, why would Oliver Stone lie?

[JohnKSa]

And no, it did not debunk any conspiracy theories--- it just presented the warren commision report with some computer simulations.

Those simulations were obviously finagled to make them work... they were not "exact recreations of the zapruder film" -- especially since one of the shots happened while zapruder's view was blocked by the street sign.
It pretty well debunked the storm drain theory.
It ruined the 4rth shot "audio evidence" theory.
It debunked the magic bullet theory.

In short, it did just what every other objective look at the evidence has done--and concluded that there is no hard evidence that disproves that Oswald was the only shooter.

BTW, the shot that was blocked by the street sign was the miss, so it's hard to see how that is conclusive evidence that the recreation was "finagled."

If you want to see finagled, take a look at the magic bullet theory. In order to make it sound plausible, you have to move Connally over and up and then turn him around facing the front when the film clearly shows him half-turned in his seat.

Personally, I have a very hard time believing that 40 years later, the government is still twiddling the media to keep the "big secret". Even the Soviet Union couldn't keep the lid on things for that long!

Don, For the record, who is it that you believe still has something to lose if the "truth" comes out AND still has power enough to make sure that it doesn't?

[Intune]

http://www.jmasland.com/z_color/

look at frames 311, 312 and 313.

[Politically Incorrect]

Don Galt,

I'm sure that it would take much more than a few minutes to come up with a computer simulation to prove anything. Rendering a few seconds of simple 3D animation takes minutes. More complex renderings can take a few hours.

Anyone ever worked with Lightwave? We have two guys in the art department at the news station I work at who are excellent with it. You can create scale models and view it from unlimited angles. This is what Dale Myers accomplished. It took him six months just to create Dealey Plaza. From my experience with the program, I would say that he spent time to get the details correct.

Stories of conspiracies are neat and make a decent plot for a movie, but I believe that we have to look what is probable, not what could be possible. Oleg Volk, standing on the Grassy Knoll with a Phased-plasma rifle in the forty watt range.

I suppose this is possible, but it's not very likely just like it's not likely that he used a time machine to go back to 1963. I can't prove that time machines don't exist (perhaps they do) or that there was no shooter on the grassy knoll (perhaps there was). It is impossible to prove a negative statement. What is possible is to show enough evidence that one solution is much more probable than other possible ones.

[AR-15Nutt]

"""""Peter Jennings is not even part of the equasion. He's just a talking head hired to narrate the program."""""

:neener: you just keep believing that !!! peter jerkoff slants everything towards a liberal lie !!!!!!!!:neener: :neener: :neener: :neener:

[Don Galt]

Like I said, I could produce a special for ABC that conclusively proves it was Oleg Volk using the same information they did.

The standards for investigation, logic and what constitutes evidence in the public eye has slipped greatly in this country.

We are at the point where people believe what they are told to believe, and they think those who question it to be crazy.

It is the triumph of irrationality over reason.

And that is why we have only two choices on the ballot box, and both of them are blatent socialists.

[BigG]

...the ABC show was worthless. It obviously started out with the contention that LHO was the lone shooter, and presented only evidence that supported that theory, and gave VERY short shrift to other views.

I agree with this. The show started with the preconceived idea that LHO acted alone and chose data to support only that hypothesis. Total junk, but well-made, interesting junk.

[Politically Incorrect]

Don Galt,

If Oswald wasn't the lone shooter, then tell me what happened according to what you believe. I'm willing to hear your argument.


The standards for investigation, logic and what constitutes evidence in the public eye has slipped greatly in this country.

I agree, which is why people believe so much in ghosts, television psychics, and conspiracy theories.

I guess if you could prove Oleg Volk assasinated Kennedy, then I would say that we lack strong evidence to point the finger at anyone. But we do have substantial evidence that shows that it was done by a lone shooter.

By all means, create a 3D model showing your version of what happened at Dealey Plaza.

We are at the point where people believe what they are told to believe, and they think those who question it to be crazy.

I don't think you're crazy. I like people who question ideas because I question those same ideas. It's taken me some time to think Oswald could have been the lone shooter. For most of my life, I accepted the idea that there just had to be someone else. I began to change my thinking after reading some posts earlier this year that interested me in finding out more.

[Don Galt]

Actually, I haven't seen any evidence yet that Oswald was the only shooter.

What they try to do is discredit any arguments that he *wasn't*.

That's not the same as showing he was.

For instance, the single bullet theory tries to explain two wounds with one shot, to allow the possibility the LHO was the single shooter.

But the wounds could have come from two bullets fired from different directions, at different times, and the bullet that people think missed might have been the one that hit Connelly. There could have been another shooter under the SBT.

The SBT merely allows the possibility (if you believe it) that LHO acted alone.

You see what I'm saying? They assume LHO acted alone and then try to prove he *could* have done it alone. But in doing so, they don't disprove the possibility that he wasn't acting alone.

I don't want to lay out the whole argument. I've made some points here and I've just gotten tired of it all. I don't see how Oswald could have known what the parade route was to get the job in advance, especially if the route was changed at the last minute. (And if it wasn't change,d the number of people in dealy plaza would have been much higher).

The headshot looks to me to have come from the grassy knoll, given the way the blood splattered. Etc.

I'm certainly not saying I know what happened, or how it happened- I can't give you a timeline and try to defend it. I don't know what happened. I'm just pointing out problems with the official story.

But by definition, since the government covered up evidence, there was a conspiracy... and I'm not just talking about the records that were sealed.

[TheeBadOne]

I don't see how Oswald could have known what the parade route was to get the job in advance, especially if the route was changed at the last minute. (And if it wasn't change,d the number of people in dealy plaza would have been much higher).
It was proven that it wasn't changed. Perhaps there would have been more people in the plaza if the misprinted route hadn't been printed, confusing people on where the route was going.

[feedthehogs]

Who cares.
Wheather it was Oswald alone or a flock of midgets hiding in the sewer, just be glad it was done.

Kennedy was the son of a crimminal who was elected by mob influence, supported by the liberal do gooders of today.

He made Clinton look like a Baptist preacher.

Imagine what it would be like if that murderer Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy had his two thug brothers beside his side?

The words Kennedy and Evil are as one and they have reaped what they have sowed.

I look forward to the next one dropping and will celebrate whole heartedly.

[tex_n_cal]

I vote that Oswald acted alone - the evidence leads to that conclusion.

Now let's talk common sense:

1. The Government has a hell of a time keeping real, desirable secrets, like names of secret agents, and submarine sonar software. Keep a coup d'etat secret? Not a chance.

2. If powerful conspirators sought to kill Kennedy, why not just drag out some of the skeletons in his closet? It's well known he had a couple of mistresses - having one of them turn up naked in the White House would have caused Kennedy a great deal of grief. Why take the risk of killing him?

3. Shooting at someone in a moving car, with a old surplus rifle, is a low percentage shot. If there was a conspiracy of evil powerful men, they would have brought better guns, and more of them.

As for feedthehogs comment, the three big assasinations of the 60's made martyrs out of men who didn't necessarily deserve it. I think we would have had a lot less liberal grief since then, without those killings, and probably less gun control laws, too. That's aside from the fact that people from all sides of the political spectrum were saddened by Kennedy's death, as well they should be.

We nearly lost Reagan to a similar nut, and how would that have changed our history? No RR to win the Cold War, and probably even more gun controls laws.

[Hkmp5sd]

The conspiracy types view Oswald as either a complete patsy or part of the conspiracy and was set up . The "evidence" framing him was done prior to the assassination. Then, multiple shooters supposedly killed JFK. Everyone immediately bailed the country, leaving Oswald as "the lone gunman."

How could these people be sure that all wounds would appear as shot from the rear? One single, obvious entrance wound in the front reveals the conspiracy.

How could they be sure that the bullets from the other guns would be unrecoverable? Ballistics on a single bullet from a rifle other than Oswald's uncovers them.

Why would they plant the "pristine bullet" on the stretcher at Parkland Hospital prior to the complete autopsy of JFK? They couldn't know how many bullets were in the body and would be recovered. They didn't know the shot that hit Connally had passed through Kennedy, which meant there could be yet another bullet inside Connally. They didn't know the first shot had missed, yet would be detected. That means if only two bullets were recovered from JFK and Connally, the "planted" bullet would be a 4th bullet, possibly a 5th bullet, proving a conspiracy.

For the assassination to be part of a conspiracy, a remarkable number of events had to happen perfectly to prevent it's detection. For 40 years, not one single person involved in the conspiracy as revealed any evidence proving it. Any idea how much absolute evidence proving the conspiracy would be worth? Yet none of those involved decided to cash in that evidence?

And this perfect conspiracy was pulled off by the same people that had tried the Bay of Pigs fiasco a couple of years earlier.

[TheeBadOne]

Dang it Hkmp5sd, logic and common sense aren't needed in a conspiracy! :D

[Cactus]

Hkmp5sd,

The conspiracy theorists have a perfectly "logical" explanation for all of those questions and it is why you will never be able to convince them that Oswald was the lone assassin: "because the government is covering up all of that evidence".

[pax]

Duplicate topic.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50678

pax