|
|
 January 21, 2012, 11:59:37 PM
|
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
I'm a new member to this forum, and I'd like to take advantage of the wealth of knowledge possessed by some members here to further round out my knowledge. These are some myths I believe that are widely held about the Kennedy assasination.
1) John Conally was in on the assassination. Even if you believe LBJ was behind the assassination.I have a hard time accepting that John Conally was so devoted to LBJ's career ambitions that he would put himself directly in the line of fire from an assassin's bullet. It seems rather absurd to me.
2) The Murchison meeting. What a smoking gun that would be! The only eyewitness I have heard attesting to that meeting was Helen Duncan Brown, who I do believe was a mistress to LBJ as I have seen an interview with her son who is the spittin' image of LBJ, and the fact that no one has disputed that she was a mistress to LBJ. Still she has a motive to write her book, as she became destitute after LBJ's death as his estate pulled her pursestrings after she had become accustomed to a lavish lifestyle as LBJ's mistress. It seems the only partial corroboration of that meeting was from the Murchison seamstress (Meg Patton) who can only attest to hearing second hand that Hoover was arriving from the airport. Brown said that journalist Helen Thomas was also there and swore so in an affadavit. If that's the case, why wouldn't she come forward at this late stage of her life? It also seemed that Brown changed her story, and only later included Jack Ruby as being in attendance that night, if I'm not mistaken.
3)Badge Man and Black Dog man: I've heard many claims to the "obvious image of a man firing a rifle" but I've never really been able to identify these figures from these computer enhanced photos. These very same photos given in evidence contain other lighting and shadow anamolies that are not even addressed. I think some are easily given over to an illusion of legitimacy if it is couched in an authenticity of being derived through the modern "state of the art" scientific techniques.
I have a question to any who would answer. Oswalds palmprint was finally tied to his gun after his death and the subsequent printing of Oswalds body by FBI agents at the funeral home. How long do palmprints or cheek prints last? Is it at all unusual LHO would have his own fingerprints on his own gun? Is there something I'm missing? 2) did they ever check the single bullet on the stretcher for either Kennedy or Conally's blood? This is such a glaring omission about the most famous and otherwise talked bullet in history.
I appreciate all your responses. Thanks
-------------------------
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 02:19:20 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 5253
|
Kirk
Welcome to the forum.most of these answers you will have to find yourself .But 1 thought could lead you anywhere.
Like what was wrong with Oswalds prints when he was processed on the 22nd ?.
And why did they take prints from the body in the crypt when they exhumed him?.
and checked his dental records?.
Ian
-------------------------
-------------------------
Some things we know we know,the rest we have to find out for ourselves
One of the first things we found out was that the Warren Commission never pursued a conspiracy investigation.
Louis Stokes
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 04:20:53 AM
|
Full Member
Posts: 134
|
They did the best they could in 1963 plus Oswald made it easy for them.
-------------------------
-------------------------
Oswald admitted his guilt when he claimed to have been a patsy.
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 04:50:29 AM
|
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
They did the best they could in 1963 plus Oswald made it easy for them.
"Did the best they could?" Even authors who have made considerable money defending the WC findings (like Posner) have admitted that there coverup by the FBI and CIA to conceal their mistakes. Members of the Church and Houses assassination comittes have accused both the FBI and CIA of a coverup. The doctors and Dallas deny the subsequent autopsy photos. This isn't just "Ct' speculation.Try looking into in a little more detail.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 05:25:11 AM
|
Full Member
Posts: 134
|
CTs have made this case more complex than it actually is.
Oswald shoots the president
Leaves the scene when he feels the heat
Kills a police man
Tries hiding in a theatre
Gets caught.
Earl Warren said if this case was not the Assasination of a president
The trial would have lasted 3 days.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 07:21:19 AM
|
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
CTs have made this case more complex than it actually is.
Oswald shoots the president
Leaves the scene when he feels the heat
Kills a police manYeah that's probably what I'd do if I killed the president. Keep a low profile and murder a cop. Earl Warren said if this case was not the Assasination of a president
The trial would have lasted 3 days. Don Hewitt, President of CBS news in 1963, starting at 2:39 of the link below quotes Earl Warren as saying " we may not know the truth in our lifetime".I don't think he's in the business of misquoting people.I wouldn't bring it up, but you quoted him. Hewitt admits he doesn't know with 100% certainty. Who he suspects knows something (at 5:06) might shock you. Or you might say," so what the hell does he know?" Go to 7:44 and you can see Dallas Police chief Jesse Curry say he believes Kennedy was hit from the front. I'll grant this is all speculation. You believe who you choose to believe and you believe the WC, and some of it's own members don't really believe their report. As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 08:35:20 AM
|
Full Member
Posts: 134
|
There were eye witnesses who picked him out of a lineup for murder. There was physical evidence linking Oswald.
You don't get it you will never get it.
That movie you posted is more quackery.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 12:25:23 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1627
|
There were eye witnesses who picked him out of a lineup for murder. There was physical evidence linking Oswald.
You don't get it you will never get it.
That movie you posted is more quackery.
Welcome to the world of insults Kirk, still like it ? There are a few things you have to take in consideration when talking with ppl like that. They believe: God created the universe. Politicians are honest hard working ppl. The WC did a fine job. Up to you how much time you want to waste in talking with "persons" like that ....
-------------------------
-------------------------
"Good Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions." Jerry Falwell " I'm not  " T Winky
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 07:38:37 PM
|
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
Welcome to the forum.most of these answers you will have to find yourself .But 1 thought could lead you anywhere.
Like what was wrong with Oswalds prints when he was processed on the 22nd ?.
And why did they take prints from the body in the crypt when they exhumed him?.
and checked his dental records?.
Ian, I appreciate your welcoming me.
And why did they take prints from the body in the crypt when they exhumed him?.
Because Marina wanted to ensure that that was her husband in the crypt. They found the crypt disturbed. They later verified after 2 years that that was Oswald in the grave. Hmmm.
I believe the crypt was disturbed, because I see no reason to doubt eyewitness testimony. My question to that is why? Is this another John Ligget story? Am I to believe they substituted a body in place of Oswald and that Oswald wasn't really killed? The funeral director Paul Groody has said that an autopsy had not been performed on the exhumed head, and that he thought a substitution coverup had taken place.Since there is little doubt to where the wounds were inflicted to Oswald. I'm at a loss for an explanation.
Like what was wrong with Oswalds prints when he was processed on the 22nd ?.
Another good question, someone felt the need to get another set of prints from Oswald and as of that time, there wasn't a clear link between Oswald. Was it because a local investigation had already been conducted with negative results and the Feds decided to tamper with evidence?
No offense Ian, But you can see my intentions from the first sentence of my post. I think if you have answers to these questions, why don't you come out with them?? Are we going to wait another 50 years? I mean, who are you, deep throat? Next you'll be telling me to follow the money.
I see this is a bifurcated forum, and I didn't join with the intention of arguing with a bunch of lone assassin advocates who haven't looked in to the matter in near the depth I have. And on the other side, I'm not here for cryptic answers, even if I asked a question about a crypt.
I've tried to answer your questions. Since you feel like me, that there was a conspiracy, and if you know the answers, why not be open to than be open to facilitating others?
I see this board is bifurcated
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 07:59:37 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6715
|
CTs have made this case more complex than it actually is.
Oswald shoots the president
Leaves the scene when he feels the heat
Kills a police man
Tries hiding in a theatre
Gets caught.
Earl Warren said if this case was not the Assasination of a president
The trial would have lasted 3 days.
Earl Warren also said we may never learn the truth and helped assure that by not putting the autopsy photographs into evidence. That's why we're here discussing the case.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 08:14:12 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6715
|
I'm a new member to this forum, and I'd like to take advantage of the wealth of knowledge possessed by some members here to further round out my knowledge. These are some myths I believe that are widely held about the Kennedy assasination.
1) John Conally was in on the assassination. Even if you believe LBJ was behind the assassination.I have a hard time accepting that John Conally was so devoted to LBJ's career ambitions that he would put himself directly in the line of fire from an assassin's bullet. It seems rather absurd to me.
2) The Murchison meeting. What a smoking gun that would be! The only eyewitness I have heard attesting to that meeting was Helen Duncan Brown, who I do believe was a mistress to LBJ as I have seen an interview with her son who is the spittin' image of LBJ, and the fact that no one has disputed that she was a mistress to LBJ. Still she has a motive to write her book, as she became destitute after LBJ's death as his estate pulled her pursestrings after she had become accustomed to a lavish lifestyle as LBJ's mistress. It seems the only partial corroboration of that meeting was from the Murchison seamstress (Meg Patton) who can only attest to hearing second hand that Hoover was arriving from the airport. Brown said that journalist Helen Thomas was also there and swore so in an affadavit. If that's the case, why wouldn't she come forward at this late stage of her life? It also seemed that Brown changed her story, and only later included Jack Ruby as being in attendance that night, if I'm not mistaken.
3)Badge Man and Black Dog man: I've heard many claims to the "obvious image of a man firing a rifle" but I've never really been able to identify these figures from these computer enhanced photos. These very same photos given in evidence contain other lighting and shadow anamolies that are not even addressed. I think some are easily given over to an illusion of legitimacy if it is couched in an authenticity of being derived through the modern "state of the art" scientific techniques.
I have a question to any who would answer. Oswalds palmprint was finally tied to his gun after his death and the subsequent printing of Oswalds body by FBI agents at the funeral home. How long do palmprints or cheek prints last? Is it at all unusual LHO would have his own fingerprints on his own gun? Is there something I'm missing? 2) did they ever check the single bullet on the stretcher for either Kennedy or Conally's blood? This is such a glaring omission about the most famous and otherwise talked bullet in history.
I appreciate all your responses. Thanks
1) I see little motivation for Connally to be part of the conspiracy. As a matter of fact he wanted to call off the motorcade because of the danger from the rightwing kooks. Your supposition that the mastermind would never be anywhere near the victim is a little off. There have been some political assassinations and Mafia hits where the mastermind was very close to the victim, such as at a meeting on neutral territory. And by your logic LBJ would not to be only a few cars behind the President if there were going to be bullets flying. One shot seemed to be a very wide miss. 2) There is nothing unusual about LBJ having a mistress. Doesn't mean he had to trust her enough to tell her all his secrets. A story coming out so many years later is not unusual. Many people feared for their lives or careers. Of course she changed her story, to make it sell better. She needed money and couldn't work. 3) Badge Man is only an optical illusion. Black Dog Man was just a spectator. 4) The cops in the crime scene team identified Oswald's fingerprints on the rifle that night. We can't prove who took Oswald's palm prints. Of course Oswald's fingerprints would be on his own rifle. They could have been there for a month, especially if he hadn't used it recently.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 22, 2012, 08:19:21 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6715
|
There were eye witnesses who picked him out of a lineup for murder. There was physical evidence linking Oswald.
You don't get it you will never get it.
That movie you posted is more quackery.
Even a kindergartener who was not in Dealey Plaza could have picked out Oswald in the line up. The only guy with a scar on his forehead from a fight. The only guy wearing just a T-shirt while everyone else is wearing suits. 48 Hours did a show about witness identification and a detective explained and gave examples of how investigators nowadays have to be extremely careful when asking witnesses to pick out a suspect because so many cases had been thrown out because of police mistakes.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
|
