Bugliosi's "Conclusion of No Conspiracy"

[Zeon Mason]

16. If, indeed, groups like the CIA, mob, military-industrial complex, or whatever, were behind the assassination, not only would they have made sure their hit man had the best firearm available, but since they wouldn?t want him to be apprehended and questioned, they almost assuredly would have equipped the firearm with a sound suppressor, most commonly known as a silencer. Silencers go all the way back to the turn of the twentieth century, and a firearms expert for the Los Angeles Police Department told me that as of 1963 they were already sophisticated enough to ?substantially diminish the report? of the weapon and to ?alter or disguise the sound,? such as to make it sound like ?the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer? or ?the operation of machinery.? He said silencers are effective, and shots at Kennedy from a weapon with the best silencer then available ?probably wouldn?t have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd? in Dealey Plaza.5
RHVB



JohnM

So that could be the reason why at Z223, that most the crowd seems not to have yet realized 2 shots have been fired, and that JFK is hit.

[John Mytton]

18. Another point is that Oswald, though a good shot, qualified as a sharpshooter and a marksman in the Marines, but never as an expert. He certainly was not the professional shooter with sniper-like accuracy any group of conspirators would have automatically employed to kill the president of the United States. The CIA or mob or military-industrial complex would have chosen someone not only from the expert category, but from among the very best within that special category.
RHVB



JohnM

[John Mytton]

19. If, for instance, organized crime (or the CIA, military-industrial complex, etc.) decided to commit the biggest murder in American history, which would result in a retaliation against them of unprecedented proportions if they were discovered to be behind it, they would select a hit man who not only was exceptionally professional and tight-lipped but also had a very successful track record with them. Oswald had no track record with them. Yet they?re going to use and rely on someone like him to kill the president of the United States? Really?
RHVB



JohnM

[Ray Mitcham]

19. If, for instance, organized crime (or the CIA, military-industrial complex, etc.) decided to commit the biggest murder in American history, which would result in a retaliation against them of unprecedented proportions if they were discovered to be behind it, they would select a hit man who not only was exceptionally professional and tight-lipped but also had a very successful track record with them. Oswald had no track record with them. Yet they?re going to use and rely on someone like him to kill the president of the United States? Really?

RHVB
JohnM

You make the case for why it wasn't Oswald. 

[Ray Mitcham]

18. Another point is that Oswald, though a good shot, qualified as a sharpshooter and a marksman in the Marines, but never as an expert. He certainly was not the professional shooter with sniper-like accuracy any group of conspirators would have automatically employed to kill the president of the United States. The CIA or mob or military-industrial complex would have chosen someone not only from the expert category, but from among the very best within that special category.
RHVB



JohnM

That's why he could never have made the shots he is alleged to have made.

[Martin Weidmann]

19. If, for instance, organized crime (or the CIA, military-industrial complex, etc.) decided to commit the biggest murder in American history, which would result in a retaliation against them of unprecedented proportions if they were discovered to be behind it, they would select a hit man who not only was exceptionally professional and tight-lipped but also had a very successful track record with them. Oswald had no track record with them. Yet they?re going to use and rely on someone like him to kill the president of the United States? Really?
RHVB

JohnM

No not really, but they might use him as the patsy Oswald said he was.

[Richard Rubio]

19. If, for instance, organized crime (or the CIA, military-industrial complex, etc.) decided to commit the biggest murder in American history, which would result in a retaliation against them of unprecedented proportions if they were discovered to be behind it, they would select a hit man who not only was exceptionally professional and tight-lipped but also had a very successful track record with them. Oswald had no track record with them. Yet they?re going to use and rely on someone like him to kill the president of the United States? Really?
RHVB



JohnM

Absolutely correct, where are all of these "clandestine meetings" with espionage agents? They are nowhere to be found, we know what Oswald was doing almost all the time, no suspicious contacts.

Patsy? Why? Because LHO squealed about the FBI following him around? He wanted to see himself as a scape goat. Oh, yeah, let's take the word of a wife beater and use pretzel logic.