Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Yesterday at 06:12:46 PM »
Quote from: John Mytton on Yesterday at 03:16:34 PM


JohnM
Your zframes have been edited.
52
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. And International Politics
« Last post by Royell Storing on Yesterday at 06:04:26 PM »

  California completely going down the tubes. Their current "election" vote counting mirrors Tammany Hall which was founded by the Dem Party. Their vote count "dumps" that are done onna daily basis, do Not specify what area of the city of Los Angeles or what county inside the state, that these vote "dump" ballots are coming from. Yet, somehow the state is guaranteeing a 2nd Place finish for Raman. This guarantee being in the face of her holding ONLY a 3,000 vote lead with an "estimated" 146,000 ballots yet to be counted. Obviously, "The Fix-Is-In".
  This is exactly why after 2020 that Trump took Elon Musk aboard. Musk and his army of computer genius's prevented the screwing around with the vote count in the 2024 POTUS vote count. You tell me. How, if 80% of the total votes in Calif come in by mail, can they give us a "% counted" on election night? Any ballot with an election day postmark gets counted. With return ballots still in the mail on election night, how can there be a "% counted" figure? You have to KNOW the total number of ballots cast to know the % of ballots that have been counted. This is Basic Math and a sad commentary on the basic math skills of the general public as well as the Media in general.   
53
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Michael Capasse on Yesterday at 06:03:50 PM »
Quote from: Lance Payette on Yesterday at 05:37:16 PM
Marina, however, was very explicit on page 231 of her HSCA testimony that he had disappeared with his rifle on "several occasions" for "several hours," saying he was "going to target practice or something like that" at a "practice range somewhere apparently." She clarified on page 255 that this was all "in Dallas."

My problem with Marina is she is an admitted liar. WC had major concerns over that.
She seems to take it all back in the 90's with a statement to the Assassination Review Board.
A look at her side thru the years has to be considered in the forum in which she feels safe enough to speak openly. 

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7364

There comes a lot of doubt because if it and brings out a major question, was Lee an FBI informant?
54
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 05:37:16 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on Yesterday at 05:23:42 PM
11/22/63: there is insufficient evidence that he had even fired a gun in the previous 4 years.

Mr. Rankin: …there are a good many stories about his practicing with a gun, you know, around various rifle ranges and so forth,
we have checked those out and none of them stand up at all.

Marina, however, was very explicit on page 231 of her HSCA testimony that he had disappeared with his rifle on "several occasions" for "several hours," saying he was "going to target practice or something like that" at a "practice range somewhere apparently." She clarified on page 255 that this was all "in Dallas." (Her WC testimony was definitely not as specific. He told her he had gone to practice at "Love Field," but only "once or twice" and she never saw him taking the rifle to practice. Jesus, what a mess - the WC tries to clear up the confusion on pages 397-398 of Volume V, and now she sees him carrying the rifle under his raincoat "only once" and she assumes he is going to Love Field because that is where the bus goes and she knows there is a lot of noise out at the airport that might cover the sound of a rifle.)
55
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 05:30:08 PM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 04:58:48 PM
Not that I think Oswald took the shots but the sloppiness and unprofessionalism of the shooting speaks of someone not proficient with a rifle.
Its a close distance shot and the shooter has plenty of time to line it up.
The target is JFK's head.
Of the three shots, two miss the target.
Some people go on about a professional hit but it was nothing of the sort. It was amateur hour.
There was at least a six second gap between JFK getting shot in the throat and the head shot. In that time JFK could have fallen to the floor of the limo or had his head hidden in Jackie's lap or the Secret Service could have done their job correctly or plenty of other possibilities. It's blind luck that JFK stayed upright to receive the fatal blow.
One of the shots missed everything!!
Anyone going on about professional hit squads needs to wake up.
It was certainly not beyond the capabilities of someone like Oswald to almost blow this easy opportunity.

I'm not sure how sloppy and unprofessional it was if the M-C was the weapon. First shot (I tend to believe) is a little low and to the right. Second shot, bingo. I mentioned long ago playing golf with a guy who had been a military sniper for 23 years and was now teaching counterterroism.. He greatly surprised me by saying he certainly could have made the shots "but not with that rifle."

John Orr's Mafia theory has 4.15 seconds between the back shot and the head shot. As you do, he notes the risk of JFK slumping out of view during that period. He explains this (with a photo on page 46 of his "Analysis of Gunshots in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963," http://www.mountainrivercabins.com/JohnOrrReport.pdf) by a tree blocking the line of site from the County Records Building. That doesn't sound like the level of professionalism I might expect from a Mafia pro, but perhaps the plan was to wait and see if Oswald got the job done, knowing that anywhere along Elm would be an easy shot for a Mafia pro. (FWIW, Orr has Oswald's first shot being the back shot, but exiting the limo rather than passing through JBC; the second shot is also by Oswald and causes JBC's wounds except the wrist wound; the third shot is the head shot by a Mafia pro in the CRB, a fragment from which causes JBC's wrist wounds; followed almost immediately by a fourth shot, also from Oswald, that hits the pavement left of the limo.)

Certainly, "squads" of gunmen violates my demand for plausibilty, but Oswald and a one-shot pro is at least in the ballpark. The theory that there was only one gunman - not Oswald - and that the shots were intentionally sloppy to make them plausibly attributable to Oswald and his M-C seems far-fetched.
56
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Michael Capasse on Yesterday at 05:23:42 PM »
11/22/63: there is insufficient evidence that he had even fired a gun in the previous 4 years.

Mr. Rankin: …there are a good many stories about his practicing with a gun, you know, around various rifle ranges and so forth,
we have checked those out and none of them stand up at all.

57
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Michael Capasse on Yesterday at 05:14:38 PM »
Quote from: John Mytton on Yesterday at 04:27:05 PM
Yawn, is that all you got, Capasse?,
JohnM

 Thumb1: It is all I need.
A low marksman qualification score is considered [not by me or you]  by the Marines to be a "rather poor shot"
58
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Royell Storing on Yesterday at 05:07:50 PM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 04:58:48 PM
Not that I think Oswald took the shots but the sloppiness and unprofessionalism of the shooting speaks of someone not proficient with a rifle.
Its a close distance shot and the shooter has plenty of time to line it up.
The target is JFK's head.
Of the three shots, two miss the target.
Some people go on about a professional hit but it was nothing of the sort. It was amateur hour.
There was at least a six second gap between JFK getting shot in the throat and the head shot. In that time JFK could have fallen to the floor of the limo or had his head hidden in Jackie's lap or the Secret Service could have done their job correctly or plenty of other possibilities. It's blind luck that JFK stayed upright to receive the fatal blow.
One of the shots missed everything!!
Anyone going on about professional hit squads needs to wake up.
It was certainly not beyond the capabilities of someone like Oswald to almost blow this easy opportunity.

    The result of the "head shot" rendering damage far beyond the damage inflicted by the earlier shots.
59
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: CTers: Do yourself a favor and focus on plausibility
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 04:58:48 PM »
Not that I think Oswald took the shots but the sloppiness and unprofessionalism of the shooting speaks of someone not proficient with a rifle.
Its a close distance shot and the shooter has plenty of time to line it up.
The target is JFK's head.
Of the three shots, two miss the target.
Some people go on about a professional hit but it was nothing of the sort. It was amateur hour.
There was at least a six second gap between JFK getting shot in the throat and the head shot. In that time JFK could have fallen to the floor of the limo or had his head hidden in Jackie's lap or the Secret Service could have done their job correctly or plenty of other possibilities. It's blind luck that JFK stayed upright to receive the fatal blow.
One of the shots missed everything!!
Anyone going on about professional hit squads needs to wake up.
It was certainly not beyond the capabilities of someone like Oswald to almost blow this easy opportunity.

 




60
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: A Car, A Garden, And A Coupla Guys
« Last post by Royell Storing on Yesterday at 04:38:37 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on May 27, 2026, 04:16:48 PM
I have no idea whether the car appears in the Wiegman film or not and I don't really care. I took you at your word that the car doesn't appear in the film but it makes no difference if it does or not. You have presented nothing that even makes me curious about it. Over the past 35 years, I have seen literally hundreds of CT rabbit holes and I have better things to do then go down every one of them. Yours is no exception. Once you've seen one rabbit hole, you've seen them all.

   "CT Rabbit Hole.............."?  I Proved the Huge Gates were "wide open". I proved this "getaway" car was Not on the Wiegman Film. This car was Not parked alongside the Island when the JFK Limo turned onto Elm St. 20 seconds later it is parked alongside the Island on the Couch/Darnell Films. These are Not RABBIT HOLES. These Legit Issues should have been Exposed decades ago. And the same goes for the Bogus Motorcycle Cop that we see on the Darnell Film walking around the train yard after the Kill Shot. These ISSUES should have been fleshed out a long time ago. Personally, I think there are those that did recognize these Issues way back when. Their avoidance of these "Conspiracy" Issues speaks to the validity of: (1) "wide open" Huge Gates, (2) a "getaway" car right across the street from these same gates, and, (3) a Bogus Motorcycle Cop deep inside the train yard. ALL of this was/is contrary to the Official Narrative that the assassination was conducted by 1 Lone Nut.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10