John Orr's analysis of the shots

[Jack Nessan]

Would that be because it differs from YOUR two-shot theory, about which Charles and others here (but not me!) would say and have said the same things? Oh, the ironies abound at JFKA forums. If folks of the caliber of Larry Schnapf think Orr's theory is worth considerably more than a second look, I'm at least going to listen.

Larry Schnapf?  The flaws in the Orr theory are obvious. If he got something right, it was totally accidental. This did explain why the Knotts Lab animation was such a disaster.

Basically, all the three shot scenarios rely on just two shots with a third shot somehow inserted somewhere into the narrative but completely unexplained and lacking any and all proof of its occurrence. Without a doubt attempting to conform to conventional thinking and nothing more. 

Most believe they must have a third shot because they are supposed to have a third shot. Even Josiah Thompson added a third shot from somewhere else after observing the real evidence on the shells, as verified by the FBI, proving there were only two shots fired by LHO. The WC, HSCA, and HSCA sound analysis all doubted the reported number of shots as medias influence. The fact there was only two shots appears over and over throughout the assassination.



It is a huge letdown to know that there were just two shots and LHO did it is the answer to the JFK Assassination given all the years of the hype about a conspiracy. There just isn’t one. 
 
 
 

[Lance Payette]

Not far from where I live, as the crow flies.

http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseSubarticle.asp?ID=168

Oh, yes, Shag Harbor is legendary - the "Canadian Roswell." It has pretty well defied mundane explanations, as has Roswell.

My special area of interest is the cases from World War II through about 1970 - before the whole Big-Eyed Grays, Alien Abduction stuff and also before the reports could reasonably be attributed to military technology. Many of the best reports practically scream "ET craft," but this is no longer the prevailing theory. The prevailing theory, mine as well, is really more in the vein of "we really have no idea." This is the theme of Stanislaw Lem's great novel Solaris - i.e., if we ever encounter an alien intelligence, we likely will have no idea what it is doing or why and may not even realize we have encountered it.

I had my own close-up encounter in the company of a diehard skeptic in 1971. It certainly looked like a craft, but there were aspects suggesting it was something more mysterious. By pure happenstance, I also happened to be smack-dab in the middle of the Travis Walton abduction case in 1975 and the Hudson Valley sightings in 1984.

But let's get this thread back on track: In 1987, I was in attendance at the MUFON annual conference in Las Vegas when wacky John Lear and scary Bill Cooper revealed - with photos! - that JFK had been killed by Greer because JFK was about to spill the Alien Secret. I later met Cooper, who was gunned down by Apache County sheriff's deputies while I was counsel to the sheriff's office in the neighboring county.

[Lance Payette]

Larry Schnapf?  The flaws in the Orr theory are obvious. If he got something right, it was totally accidental. This did explain why the Knotts Lab animation was such a disaster.

Basically, all the three shot scenarios rely on just two shots with a third shot somehow inserted somewhere into the narrative but completely unexplained and lacking any and all proof of its occurrence. Without a doubt attempting to conform to conventional thinking and nothing more. 

Most believe they must have a third shot because they are supposed to have a third shot. Even Josiah Thompson added a third shot from somewhere else after observing the real evidence on the shells, as verified by the FBI, proving there were only two shots fired by LHO. The WC, HSCA, and HSCA sound analysis all doubted the reported number of shots as medias influence. The fact there was only two shots appears over and over throughout the assassination.



It is a huge letdown to know that there were just two shots and LHO did it is the answer to the JFK Assassination given all the years of the hype about a conspiracy. There just isn’t one.

Surely you are sharp enough to see the irony here? As stated previously, I read Phantom Shot and found it plausible. Alas, it does not seem to have caused so much as a fart ripple in the small pond of the JFKA research community. Does that not seem odd if it's all so "obvious"? Why would the LN community be so disinterested? Moreover, I see you being attacked on threads here with the same disdain and dismissiveness that you express toward Schnapf, Orr and many participants here. Isn't this just all business as usual in the wacky, quasi-religious world of JFKA debate?

Orr and Schnapf have hit upon what has always seemed to me the most plausible theory IF THERE WAS A CONSPIRACY. Hence, I am willing to listen, just as I am willing to listen to the three-shot LN theory and the two-shot LN theory but not so much the Greer-did-it theory, the Harvey & Lee theory, the LBJ/CIA/FBI/DPD/Yada Yada-did-it-theory, the Mossad-did-it theory, the KGB-did-it theory or umpteen other conspiracy theories that are not, in my opinion, within the ballpark of plausibility.

To address Charles' point, I was raised in a completely apolitical household. I'm not aware that my parents ever voted and am pretty sure they didn't. I was ten at the time of the 1960 election and recall absolutely no discussion or interest in either JFK or Nixon. I was 13 when JFK was assassinated. It meant nothing to me but a couple of days off from school. I was neither happy nor sad nor even particularly interested. Ditto with MLK and RFK; perhaps I should be embarrassed to admit it, but none of it meant diddly squat to me.  The JFKA has never been anything to me but a historical event that is of interest for pretty much the same reasons that UFOs, reincarnation, the Shroud of Turin and lots of other things have always been of interest - for an assassination, it's full of a great deal of almost preternatural weirdness and mystery. As odd as it may seem, I also find Oswald a fascinating and somewhat sympathetic figure, far more interesting than JFK or any other aspect of the JFKA. My interest was revived in 2007 when I visited my fiancé in Minsk, saw Oswald's apartment, learned that her sister and brother-in-law had worked in the same factory and so on and so forth. I have utterly no emotional involvement in the JFKA and truly don't care, except as a matter of curiosity, whether the LN narrative or some conspiracy theory is correct.

[Charles Collins]

Surely you are sharp enough to see the irony here? As stated previously, I read Phantom Shot and found it plausible. Alas, it does not seem to have caused so much as a fart ripple in the small pond of the JFKA research community. Does that not seem odd if it's all so "obvious"? Why would the LN community be so disinterested? Moreover, I see you being attacked on threads here with the same disdain and dismissiveness that you express toward Schnapf, Orr and many participants here. Isn't this just all business as usual in the wacky, quasi-religious world of JFKA debate?

Orr and Schnapf have hit upon what has always seemed to me the most plausible theory IF THERE WAS A CONSPIRACY. Hence, I am willing to listen, just as I am willing to listen to the three-shot LN theory and the two-shot LN theory but not so much the Greer-did-it theory, the Harvey & Lee theory, the LBJ/CIA/FBI/DPD/Yada Yada-did-it-theory, the Mossad-did-it theory, the KGB-did-it theory or umpteen other conspiracy theories that are not, in my opinion, within the ballpark of plausibility.

To address Charles' point, I was raised in a completely apolitical household. I'm not aware that my parents ever voted and am pretty sure they didn't. I was ten at the time of the 1960 election and recall absolutely no discussion or interest in either JFK or Nixon. I was 13 when JFK was assassinated. It meant nothing to me but a couple of days off from school. I was neither happy nor sad nor even particularly interested. Ditto with MLK and RFK; perhaps I should be embarrassed to admit it, but none of it meant diddly squat to me.  The JFKA has never been anything to me but a historical event that is of interest for pretty much the same reasons that UFOs, reincarnation, the Shroud of Turin and lots of other things have always been of interest - for an assassination, it's full of a great deal of almost preternatural weirdness and mystery. As odd as it may seem, I also find Oswald a fascinating and somewhat sympathetic figure, far more interesting than JFK or any other aspect of the JFKA. My interest was revived in 2007 when I visited my fiancé in Minsk, saw Oswald's apartment, learned that her sister and brother-in-law had worked in the same factory and so on and so forth. I have utterly no emotional involvement in the JFKA and truly don't care, except as a matter of curiosity, whether the LN narrative or some conspiracy theory is correct.

for an assassination, it's full of a great deal of almost preternatural weirdness and mystery.


Please give us some examples of what aspects of the assassination you consider “almost preternatural weirdness and mystery”. Does the SBT still appear to be that unnatural and mysterious to you?


According to Google:

The preternatural (or praeternatural) is that which appears outside, beside or beyond (Latin: præter) the natural.

[Lance Payette]

for an assassination, it's full of a great deal of almost preternatural weirdness and mystery.


Please give us some examples of what aspects of the assassination you consider “almost preternatural weirdness and mystery”. Does the SBT still appear to be that unnatural and mysterious to you?


According to Google:

The preternatural (or praeternatural) is that which appears outside, beside or beyond (Latin: præter) the natural.

Charles, surely you jest. If they were tripping on LSD, Agatha Christie, Arthur Conan Doyle and Damon Runyan together on their best day couldn't have come up with Oswald's life story, the bizarre events of Dealey Plaza, the Tippit murder, Ruby's life and offing of Oswald, the Parkland fiasco, the autopsy follies, and the ensuing 60 years of brouhaha with 25 mutually exclusive conspiracy theories.

"Beyond the natural"? Well, yeah, I'd say so. Preternatural in the sense of "You couldn't make this stuff up."

[Lance Payette]

OK, I'm sick of this thread, too, and apparently no gung-ho CTer is going to defend Orr.

Final word from me:

I have now forced myself to watch the entire Orr video I posted. This is clearly Orr as influenced by Larry Schnapf - who, I must admit, has revealed himself at the Ed Forum to be somewhat more in the wacky vein than I had previously appreciated. I reject what Orr says in the video almost in its entirety.

The posited conspiracy is so elaborate, convoluted, insanely risky and un-Mafia-like that we’re once again back in the land of the Three Stooges. I can accept a four-shot, Mafia-organized conspiracy with Oswald believing he was participating in a pro-Castro operation, but I cannot accept this as being even in the ballpark of plausibility.

Stay with me here: Oswald, via family connections with the Marcello operation (Marguerite and the Murrets), was a knowing recruit in February of 1963, likely promised wads of cash. He may not have been an enthusiastic recruit, but he knew he could not refuse Marcello and live. Everything after February was a sham to make Oswald the perfect patsy – the rifle purchase, the Backyard Photos, the attempt on Walker, and all the faux pro-Cuba activities including the trip to Mexico City. The assassination was planned by Bannister, Ferrie and the usual Cubans. Marcello owned the Carousel Club and Ruby was his point man in Dallas, heavily involved in the planning and responsible for making sure the plan was implemented. All the wads of cash Ruby used to flash were actually Marcello’s money. Marcello caught Ruby skimming from the till and pulled him into the JFKA on the basis of this leverage. He and Oswald may have met in Oak Cliff Park as needed. The plan was for both Oswald and the pro in the County Records Building to escape. Everything went awry when Oswald killed Tippit and was apprehended. When Oswald said he was a patsy, he meant a patsy of the DPD but Marcello thought it meant Oswald was going to squawk and Ruby thus was assigned to silence him.

Oh, Jesus, I can’t even keep it all straight or describe it with a straight face. Am I the only person who gives the Mafia more credit for professionalism than this? Do people of the intelligence level of Schnapf and Orr seriously think Marcello, Trafficante and Giancana would place their lives in the hands of erratic, low-level clowns like Ferrie, Oswald and Ruby, not to mention Bannister and others? Are you kidding me? This is ad hoc, after-the-fact speculation to the max, so full of holes and obvious “What sense would that have made?” red flags that I am simply agog.

I thus remain to be convinced of a Mafia-organized conspiracy, but it’s going to have to be a tight, professional, minimal-risk operation in which Curly, Larry and Moe played no role. Pretty much a garden variety Mafia hit, with Oswald as a patsy who posed no risk even if caught.

FWIW, Orr stands by his 1995 analysis, “which no one has ever refuted.”

[Tim Nickerson]

OK, I'm sick of this thread, too, and apparently no gung-ho CTer is going to defend Orr.

Final word from me:

I have now forced myself to watch the entire Orr video I posted. This is clearly Orr as influenced by Larry Schnapf - who, I must admit, has revealed himself at the Ed Forum to be somewhat more in the wacky vein than I had previously appreciated. I reject what Orr says in the video almost in its entirety.

The posited conspiracy is so elaborate, convoluted, insanely risky and un-Mafia-like that we’re once again back in the land of the Three Stooges. I can accept a four-shot, Mafia-organized conspiracy with Oswald believing he was participating in a pro-Castro operation, but I cannot accept this as being even in the ballpark of plausibility.

Stay with me here: Oswald, via family connections with the Marcello operation (Marguerite and the Murrets), was a knowing recruit in February of 1963, likely promised wads of cash. He may not have been an enthusiastic recruit, but he knew he could not refuse Marcello and live. Everything after February was a sham to make Oswald the perfect patsy – the rifle purchase, the Backyard Photos, the attempt on Walker, and all the faux pro-Cuba activities including the trip to Mexico City. The assassination was planned by Bannister, Ferrie and the usual Cubans. Marcello owned the Carousel Club and Ruby was his point man in Dallas, heavily involved in the planning and responsible for making sure the plan was implemented. All the wads of cash Ruby used to flash were actually Marcello’s money. Marcello caught Ruby skimming from the till and pulled him into the JFKA on the basis of this leverage. He and Oswald may have met in Oak Cliff Park as needed. The plan was for both Oswald and the pro in the County Records Building to escape. Everything went awry when Oswald killed Tippit and was apprehended. When Oswald said he was a patsy, he meant a patsy of the DPD but Marcello thought it meant Oswald was going to squawk and Ruby thus was assigned to silence him.

Oh, Jesus, I can’t even keep it all straight or describe it with a straight face. Am I the only person who gives the Mafia more credit for professionalism than this? Do people of the intelligence level of Schnapf and Orr seriously think Marcello, Trafficante and Giancana would place their lives in the hands of erratic, low-level clowns like Ferrie, Oswald and Ruby, not to mention Bannister and others? Are you kidding me? This is ad hoc, after-the-fact speculation to the max, so full of holes and obvious “What sense would that have made?” red flags that I am simply agog.

I thus remain to be convinced of a Mafia-organized conspiracy, but it’s going to have to be a tight, professional, minimal-risk operation in which Curly, Larry and Moe played no role. Pretty much a garden variety Mafia hit, with Oswald as a patsy who posed no risk even if caught.

FWIW, Orr stands by his 1995 analysis, “which no one has ever refuted.”

I like Larry Schnapf, even though I don't really know him. We are Facebook friends. I probed him once on the mock trial of Oswald that he participated in as a defense counsel for Oswald. Other than that, I haven't discussed the assassination with him at all. He seems like a decent fellow. He does believe that Oswald did not kill JFK, and that will never change.  I wasn't aware that he was involved with John Orr's project. That would indicate that he has a wacky streak in him. I haven't watched the Out of the Blank John Orr interview but I have read enough of Orr's "Analysis of Gunshots in Dealey Plaza" report to conclude that there is something seriously wrong with his wiring.