Tippit Shooting, 1:15

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Tippit Shooting, 1:15  (Read 293381 times)

Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #84 on: October 10, 2019, 06:21:33 PM »
What is the logic behind this mind numbing claim?  It's difficult to understand why we should take a reporter's version of events "with a large dose of salt" simply because he believes Oswald is guilty.  Maybe he came to that conclusion based on the evidence.  He was there on the scene.  Are you suggesting he intentionally lied for some reason?  Was he part of the frame up, for example?
Aynesworth wrote this about the single bullet theory and the WC (this is from his book "Eyewitness to History.")

"The only subject I woudn't touch [with Mark Lane] was one I still refuse to touch today. I do not know how to explain Kennedy's and Connally's wound. The Warren Commission might be correct or perhaps totally wrong about its much-maligned single bullet theory, the belief that a single bullet slammed through the president's back and throat and then into Governor Connally. I do know that I heard three distinct shots that afternoon."

For a supposed lifelong WC defender that's a pretty odd statement - "they might be correct or perhaps totally wrong" - about a key claim made by the commission.

It's funny that Aynesworth has been called a CIA asset by some in the "There was a conspiracy camp" (yeah, they call everyone who disagree with them that but never mind). He said that one of his biggest mistakes was giving Mark Lane his (Aynesworth's) work on the assassination. This included his notes and interviews and other material that he compiled BEFORE the Warren Commission was formed.

So why did this controlled CIA asset helped Mark Lane?
« Last Edit: October 10, 2019, 08:29:36 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #85 on: October 10, 2019, 08:02:11 PM »
I don’t know why Aynesworth’s hearsay would be any more reliable than anyone else’s.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #86 on: October 10, 2019, 09:10:22 PM »
For a supposed lifelong WC defender that's a pretty odd statement - "they might be correct or perhaps totally wrong" - about a key claim made by the commission.

He might have realized how far out it was...

So why did this controlled CIA asset helped Mark Lane?

I'm sure Graves is ready to lecture you on why or why not this might be the case.

He might have realized how far out it was...

Eyewitness Charles Brehm said the following in his interview by Larry Sneed in his book “No More Silence.”

“Within hours after the knowledge was given to me that Connally was also wounded, I said the only thing that I could think of was that a bullet that went through the President had also obviously hit Connally because there were only three shots fired: one went wild and two hit the President. The question then was how could it have happened? At that time, it was very easy for me to open up my shirt and show the bullet wound in what was the solar plexus, to come over here and show the exit wound where it passed through my body and came out between my ribs; then the second part of the bullet, the damage, because the bullet was softened and out of shape, tore my arm apart. One bullet did that to me! Any questions that night about what a single bullet can do, my God, I was living proof of it that day!”

So apparently, Arlen Spector wasn’t the first one to think of that theory. And it isn’t that far out either.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #87 on: October 10, 2019, 09:24:46 PM »
Charles Brehm was wounded?

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #88 on: October 10, 2019, 09:34:56 PM »

Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #89 on: October 10, 2019, 09:48:17 PM »
Hugh Aynesworth had over thirty plus years of reporting which included hundreds, if not thousands, of articles (and several books). We are literally talking about tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of words. Thousands of interviews. It's a lot of work including not only the JFK assassination but the Waco siege, Ted Bundy and other horrible stories.

To my knowledge there hasn't been a single allegation of any unethical or improper reporting on his part. No one has claimed that he or she was misquoted, no stories were retracted, no allegations of inaccurate stories (although I'm sure over that time he got some facts wrong).

This is a serious, professional journalist. Not a hack.

Yet we're supposed to consider his "hearsay" as not being any more credible than anyone else's "hearsay"?
« Last Edit: October 10, 2019, 09:48:58 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Tippit Shooting, 1:15
« Reply #90 on: October 10, 2019, 10:07:13 PM »
Earlene Roberts WC testimony

Mrs. Roberts: He went to his room and he was in his shirt sleeves but I couldn't tell you whether it was a long-sleeved shirt or what color it was or nothing, and he got a jacket and put it on---it was kind of a zipper jacket.

-----------------------------

And Oswald was wearing a Tshirt that day, not an undershirt