Never mind a conspiracy. 56 years later, and there’s still no proof that Oswald killed Kennedy. Just assumptions and rhetoric.
All of the physical evidence that exists points to Oswald and no one else. No physical evidence exists which points to anyone other than Oswald.
You said it yourself, all the evidence leads to Oswald and if it wasn't Oswald then all the incriminating evidence must have come about somehow?
You dispute the evidence, call cops liars, say eyewitnesses were mistaken etc, so this all by itself should lead you to some sort of conclusion, why waste your time with someone who you know "still has no proof of guilt".
All of the physical evidence that exists points to Oswald and no one else. No physical evidence exists which points to anyone other than Oswald.
Actually, there's plenty of proof from the autopsy that Oswald could not possibly have acted alone. Witnesses describe Humes probing the back wound and finding no exit. That alone kills the lone nut scenario. Ask the Parkland and Bethesda witnesses where the head wound was. If the shooter from behind hit the president's head, we would see a violent motion forward, right? Instead, all the films show a violent "back and to the left" motion and a wound in the lower right portion of the President's head. That is totally incompatible with a head shot from behind. Sorry lone nutters, but if Oswald was the assassin, all the facts would come together easily. Instead, we have evidence of multiple shooters and trying to force Arlen Specter's boneheaded theory into the history books is an atrocity. The truth is much more complex. The fact that the real killers escaped is hard to accept. But these were professional killers who had a plan and executed it very well.
All of the physical evidence that exists points to Oswald and no one else. No physical evidence exists which points to anyone other than Oswald.
That's what it's supposed to do, Bill. Surely you didn't think the government was going to publish anything other than what they did when they all had their marching orders? Duh!
Here's one of my all-time favorite photos. The official investigation has begun. Investigators have marked the Kennedy stand-in's back and we're in Dealey Plaza to boot. The marks on the back are based on the measurements from the official autopsy and all are very accurate.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall during this reenactment listening in:
GMan 1: "How in the hell was that back shot [which was a shallow wound and no through and through exit per the autopsy] supposed to come out his neck like we got it marked here?"
GMan 2: "Beats me."
LOLOLOL!
But of course you and others, Bill, will continue to keep that old wool over your eyes because...why? Most probably because you simply don't like the Kennedys. It's the old bias, Bill. LOLOLOL!
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4gdWxEAnONc/XdgYq04sAqI/AAAAAAAAFdE/5vYcXgq0EgU1pGsHfVT67PHfvbXREt7JQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
Here we are 56 years later and we still have no idea who was behind the conspiracy, so far it could be The Dallas Police or Hoover or The CIA or some sort of rogue element or the military or basically anybody but Oswald, but why is no one bright enough to figure this out, surely with the thousands of enthusiasts someone has to stumble into some solid evidence, where is it?
Why has nobody even come close to exposing any conspiracy, is it because it was Oswald and all the evidence just fits?
Anyway, if someone knows something and can back this up with proof then let's hear it, or otherwise your time is running out and I'm afraid without some decent evidence history will forever find Oswald guilty of killing two men. That's just how it works.
JohnM
As usual, John Iacoletti is spot on. If LHO was a LN assassin then surely there would be a smoking gun by now, so where is it? Instead there's a crapload of contradictions, excuses and cover ups. For example, I asked you in another thread, which as usual you conveniently ignored, who gave JFK a haircut during the autopsy?
Mytton tell me why we are looking at the same person in your 2 morphs.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184590/m1/1/med_res/) | (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184612/m1/1/small_res/) |
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTjzYtMq/JFKAutopsy-Morphsmallermoreframes.gif) Long on top | (https://i.postimg.cc/0N8FDFS8/JFKBOH.gif) Short at back |
Oswald: I'm innocent.
JudgeJohnny: Okay, you can go, my darling.
Oswald: Well, that's it... it's all over now.
You lot are much more likely to harbour dislike for the Kennedy's, given your rabid support for the only man on the face of the planet known to have been Johnny-on-the-spot at both murder scenes. It boggles the mind that that fact would not give one pause.
"Autopsy Haircut" :P
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184590/m1/1/med_res/) (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184612/m1/1/small_res/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTjzYtMq/JFKAutopsy-Morphsmallermoreframes.gif)
Long on top(https://i.postimg.cc/0N8FDFS8/JFKBOH.gif)
Short at back
Agreed, Kennedy had longer hair on top, which is just wet in the back of head shot, I think it's been so long since these guys have had hair they forget what happens when it gets wet..
And it seems that the photos either represent one man with a haircut or two dead men, why use two men, WHY?
JohnM
Here we are 56 years later and we still have no idea who was behind the conspiracy, so far it could be The Dallas Police or Hoover or The CIA or some sort of rogue element or the military or basically anybody but Oswald, but why is no one bright enough to figure this out, surely with the thousands of enthusiasts someone has to stumble into some solid evidence, where is it?
Why has nobody even come close to exposing any conspiracy, is it because it was Oswald and all the evidence just fits?
Anyway, if someone knows something and can back this up with proof then let's hear it, or otherwise your time is running out and I'm afraid without some decent evidence history will forever find Oswald guilty of killing two men. That's just how it works.
JohnM
Here we are 56 years later and we still have no idea who was behind the conspiracy,
If you don't know...It's because you don't want to know... There's a mountain of evidence that illuminates the truth, but you prefer to remain in the dark.
56 years later and still no proof of a conspiracy.The proof lies in everybody's lies.
Here we are 56 years later and we still have no idea who was behind the conspiracy, so far it could be The Dallas Police or Hoover or The CIA or some sort of rogue element or the military or basically anybody but Oswald, but why is no one bright enough to figure this out, surely with the thousands of enthusiasts someone has to stumble into some solid evidence, where is it?
Why has nobody even come close to exposing any conspiracy, is it because it was Oswald and all the evidence just fits?
Anyway, if someone knows something and can back this up with proof then let's hear it, or otherwise your time is running out and I'm afraid without some decent evidence history will forever find Oswald guilty of killing two men. That's just how it works.
JohnM
But...... but........ haven't you been listening to Judyth Baker and her Conventioneers? Surely all of them can't be wrong..... I wonder if she went to Groden's wedding? LOL !!!!
Oswald: I'm innocent.
JudgeJohnny: Okay, you can go, my darling.
Oswald: Well, that's it... it's all over now.
Seems not a great change over the generations. 56 years and still about 2:1 that don’t accept the WC narrative. who will eventually prevail, HSCA or WC?
I feel your frustration.
C'mon Colin, it's a poll asking the general population what they believe, what do they know? In fact I reckon half of this Forum doesn't have a clue about the evidence.
12 average people heard the evidence in the London Trial and they found Oswald guilty. Gerry Spence put up a good fight and was very very good and he used the "We just don't know what happened" defence, the same defence it seems being used by the majority of CT's and this is why it doesn't work, people want a narrative and they want a bad guy but the JFK CT's are far too scattered hence the broad Gerry Spence defence which was his downfall.
JohnM
In reality it is you who calls assumptions and rhetoric “evidence”, cherry-picks witnesses, and assumes that if a cop says something, it therefore must be true.
If you think your case is closed, why do you waste your time trying to make it over and over?
C'mon Colin, it's a poll asking the general population what they believe, what do they know? In fact I reckon half of this Forum doesn't have a clue about the evidence.
12 average people heard the evidence in the London Trial and they found Oswald guilty. Gerry Spence put up a good fight and was very very good and he used the "We just don't know what happened" defence, the same defence it seems being used by the majority of CT's and this is why it doesn't work, people want a narrative and they want a bad guy but the JFK CT's are far too scattered hence the broad Gerry Spence defence which was his downfall.
JohnM
I watched multiple news stations this November 22nd and saw no stories on this 56th anniversary. Has it slid into history at this point? Did anybody see news of the anniversary?
people want a narrative and they want a bad guy
For some people this is absolutely true. For them a simple narrative, even a flawed one, is easier to comprehend and accept than a frightning unresolved nefarious alternative. A simple story (true or false) is comforting to them as it allows them to not ask the hard questions. Some people don't want the truth, they just want to ease their minds.
I was watching for something but didn't catch anything on television on the news, I did see online there is a FOX affiliate from Mobile, AL was having a weeklong series called Gulfcoast connection to the JFK assassination with a story every night.
Paraphrasing Vince Salandria, he wrote that the assassination cover story and its details were transparent or flimsy on purpose with those responsible not worried. Maybe like a bad parent lying to a child with no worries of repercussion.
Actually, there's plenty of proof from the autopsy that Oswald could not possibly have acted alone. Witnesses describe Humes probing the back wound and finding no exit. That alone kills the lone nut scenario. Ask the Parkland and Bethesda witnesses where the head wound was. If the shooter from behind hit the president's head, we would see a violent motion forward, right? Instead, all the films show a violent "back and to the left" motion and a wound in the lower right portion of the President's head. That is totally incompatible with a head shot from behind. Sorry lone nutters, but if Oswald was the assassin, all the facts would come together easily. Instead, we have evidence of multiple shooters and trying to force Arlen Specter's boneheaded theory into the history books is an atrocity. The truth is much more complex. The fact that the real killers escaped is hard to accept. But these were professional killers who had a plan and executed it very well.
people want a narrative and they want a bad guy
. . . whether it’s true or not.
You've had more than half a century to come up with an alternate narrative, how much longer do we have to wait?
You've had more than half a century to come up with an alternate narrative, how much longer do we have to wait?Nonsense. The alternative?---The official story is an obviously conjured up concoction of crap. Who cares if you 'have to wait'?
You've had more than half a century to come up with an alternate narrative, how much longer do we have to wait?
JohnM
Never gets old.
Judge Billy: what evidence do you have that Oswald killed Kennedy.
Prosecutor: <crickets>
Judge Billy: I don’t care, because I’m 100% sure he probably did it.
Hosty testified that he did not know until the evening of Thursday November 21, that there was to be a motorcade and never realized that the motorcade would pass the Texas School Book Depository Building.
“Known to have been”. LOL.
Um, witnesses..
> Never have I come across someone so utterly egotistical that he cannot imagine himself ever being mocked.
Um, biased, unfair lineups..
You just suck at mockery. And comedy.
Um, no jacket on Oswald in any lineup
Here we are 56 years later and we still have no idea who was behind the conspiracy, so far it could be The Dallas Police or Hoover or The CIA or some sort of rogue element or the military or basically anybody but Oswald, but why is no one bright enough to figure this out, surely with the thousands of enthusiasts someone has to stumble into some solid evidence, where is it?
Why has nobody even come close to exposing any conspiracy, is it because it was Oswald and all the evidence just fits?
Anyway, if someone knows something and can back this up with proof then let's hear it, or otherwise your time is running out and I'm afraid without some decent evidence history will forever find Oswald guilty of killing two men. That's just how it works.
JohnM
As if that somehow makes it fair.
::)