Firearms experts who say; ?I can't do it so it can't be done?, cannot be trusted

[Ross Lidell]

That is a wonderful argument.
Because your cousin Jesse V said it's impossible.
Why would you even care if your cousin Jesse believes, I don't?

Below is some footage from Tom Alyea. This is filmed inside the TSBD after the shooting. In the 1st part of the film, you will see an FBI agent looking out a window. As he backs up out of the window he looks surprised then changes his direction and walks toward the camera filming him. What is the agent carrying in his left hand?

Pete, there's one thing that we can agree on: The very-low definition of movie cameras (circa 1963) used by news organizations causes great frustration when viewing archival film footage exposed in them . If HD Video Cameras were available in 1963, we could now identify with accuracy details that would eliminate silly theories. Ergo, the exact type of rifle might be discerned.

The rifle carried by the man is not a Mauser. I cannot see a bolt-action, so it might be a M1 Garand? It's probably a rifle carried as an attack/defense weapon.

Incidentally, how do you know the man is an FBI agent?

[Ross Lidell]

You have failed to support the claim that LHO fired a shot so why would I waste time proving anything regarding LHO and the firing of shots?

Then don't post in this topic.

[Rob Caprio]

Then don't post in this topic.

So you are admitting that you cannot support the WC's claim that LHO fired any shots on November 22, 1963. Good of you to do that.

[Ross Lidell]

So you are admitting that you cannot support the WC's claim that LHO fired any shots on November 22, 1963. Good of you to do that.

No I'm not making that admission... any admission.

Look at the Subject: title.

You are invited to accept or reject my theory. If it's the latter... with "supporting evidence".

Something like: "Yes they can be trusted implicitly and here's the reason why:      ".

[John Iacoletti]

I'm so charitable in my assessment of debating opponents. So you are not a researcher (of the JFK Assassination case). That begs the question: What are you?

Cool. Where did you get the ?at the behest of evil conspirators? nonsense?

Not every facet... some facets. There's something strange about someone believing the 6th floor rifle was a Mauser not the Carcano C2766: Then having no interest in exploring how it fits with a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.

I think you?re confusing the reluctance to make up a narrative for which there is no evidence with disinterest. Three witnesses said there was a Mauser. Making up a narrative about the evidence doesn?t change the nature of the evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

No I'm not making that admission... any admission.

Look at the Subject: title.

You are invited to accept or reject my theory. If it's the latter... with "supporting evidence".

Something like: "Yes they can be trusted implicitly and here's the reason why:      ".

You could make the same argument about ANY ?expert? opinion on various facets of the case. You trust the ones that confirm your biases.

[Mike Orr]

For all of those firearms experts who have tried and failed to duplicate what LHO was supposed to have done that day in Dallas, there comes a time for most people to just say that those shots were not done by just one man ! If there was definitive proof of one man causing all those wounds then there would be those who would buy into that scenario . When I listen to those like Dr. Cyril Wecht and Douglas Horne go by a thorough breakdown of wounds on JFK & JC , it becomes more clear that Arlen Specter and Gerald Ford brought in too many variables that just didn't add up to what really happened on Nov. 22nd 1963 . We are led to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald pulled off 2 killings all by himself . The thoughts of people that differ so much in this case mirrors something that we are dealing with now with Trump and his doings . Can we be so far apart on right and wrong that we can't see what's in front of us ?