50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

[solovsfett]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

with regard to the handling of the rifle...man I'm very surprised anyone's prints could be lifted with any veracity at all when you've had at least from what I can tell from the NatGeo video 3-5 guys handling the rifle with bare hands

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

There was mention of a mob connection in the book "The Five Families" (which is an EXCELLENT book on the history of the NY Mafia). It never said outright, nor did the people interviewed for the book say outright, that the mob was connected, but there WAS a lot of hemming and hawing about a connection/knowledge of some sort of contract. This included current and ex-mobsters at the time of the book.

Former FBI people say they had extensive (illegal) wiretaps on the mob. In those days they were much less sophisticated than they ultimately became about such matters. And ever though these guys discussed capital crimes like little league results, there was never a mention of killing JFK.

[The Rube]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

Former FBI people say they had extensive (illegal) wiretaps on the mob. In those days they were much less sophisticated than they ultimately became about such matters. And ever though these guys discussed capital crimes like little league results, there was never a mention of killing JFK.

They were illegal, that is true. And this book...it really does not pull punches for or against the gub'ment, nor the Mob.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

Former FBI people say they had extensive (illegal) wiretaps on the mob. In those days they were much less sophisticated than they ultimately became about such matters. And ever though these guys discussed capital crimes like little league results, there was never a mention of killing JFK.

Given that J. Edgar Hoover was still very much in charge of the FBI in 1963, I'm inclined to believe it.

[The Rube]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

Given that J. Edgar Hoover was still very much in charge of the FBI in 1963, I'm inclined to believe it.

And THAT is why I tend to believe certain books over "official" news at times.

[French Rage]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

I want to know who really murdered Teddy Kennedy.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

I want to know who really murdered Teddy Kennedy.

Bushes' fault

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

this is why (in part) I'm less inclined to believe the official LHO thought it up and did it story. Because every couple of years someone who "knows" or has presumably locked up the case comes out a with book or re-review of the sniper's angle and re-enacts the whole thing to prove there was no magic bullet or that LHO could do it in 6 seconds etc (much the same as the conspiracy guys as well, of course), and it tells me that if the case was so cut and dried/locked up...why are they spending so much time and money on what amounts to a propaganda campaign to ensure the public LHO did it? the fact the government has tried so hard to convince people of their story has me skeptical. Who in the end is paying for moving street lights etc back to their original positions in 1963 to get these tests done ad nauseum? the last test I saw (was it pbs?) the sniper's 2nd shot hit a light post and not concrete, it was pretty interesting stuff (I suppose if you re-ran it w/the original players it would turn out differently each time though) point is... if they've got their man why do they care about what I or anyone else thinks?

I can't claim to know what happened on 11-22-63 in dallas and I feel like no-one really can.

I don't know about pristine bullet any more than I know about the fact there wasn't a 2nd shooter. Where is the bullet and a place I can see the entire thing (the bullet) btw?

Tying LHO to Tippitt seemed an egregious error. As I recall it eyewitnesses described a heavy-set man who shot the cop then was picked up in a car and left?

but I digress, what we have not much of are facts, what we have a lot of is opinion or speculation. Sadly, that's where it ends I guess

The "government" is making exactly zero effort to convince you. The reality is the opposite of that. The Warren Commission studied the events, issued a report and went out of business. All of its members are now dead. There is no Warren Commission office. No Warren Commission PR people. No Warren Commission press releases. Conspiracists, on the other hand, grow like that stuff that comes out of the cracks of your driveway. And they've been writing and rewriting "history" every since. Some of them even make movies. I find it interesting that only two writers of any prominence have tackled this subject, and both concluded LHO did it and there was no conspiracy. As I mentioned initially, in the 50 years since JFK's murder, the only consensus offered by conspiracists is that Oswald didn't do it. Doesn't it strike you as strange that in half a century they haven't come any closer to coming up with a unified version of what they claim happened than the nonsense they started peddling in 1963?

In recent years the documentaries have tended to support the official version of the event. At least to the extent that they demolish conspiracists' pet theories. There was one on PBS Wednesday night showing that the "magic bullet" could easily have done what was claimed, without any significant damage to the round. Common statements of "fact" from conspiracists: "Oswald didn't have time to make it down the stairs to the lunchroom where he was questioned briefly by a cop." Shown to be absolute nonsense. "Oswald couldn't have made it from his rooming house to where he killed Officer Tippet." Also absolute nonsense. Those walks were recreated and timed for one documentary and they were well within his capabilities. "Oswald was a bad shot" Tripe. "That picture of Oswald with the rifle, pistol and Daily Worker was a photo montage " (an idea featured prominently in JFK). The photography panel of the House Assassinations Committee established that: the photo was not a montage, that it had been taken by Marina's camera (to the exclusion of all other cameras, similar to ballistics) and that Oswald had given an autographed copy of one of the several shots taken in that session to his friend George de Mohrenshildt. If this picture was created to implicate Oswald in a killing of which he was innocent, it seems rather unlikely the CIA (or whoever) would be so careless as to let him get his hands on a copy in advance of the killing. He gave the autographed photo to his friend because he was proud of it and himself.

LOL, that nonsense about Tippet's shooter being heavy set is straight out of JFK, and Oliver Stone, notwithstanding his 50 million dollar budget, is not a reliable source. Oswald was positively identified by 7 or 8 witnesses in lineups that night as the man who shot Tippet. And his pistol was similarly identified as the gun used to kill the officer. Perhaps the most unintentionally funny line in film history occurs in JFK when Donald Sutherland (playing Fletcher Prouty) says to Kevin Costner: (paraphrasing) "I could give you a phony name, but I won't. Just call me Mr. X."

The various Warren Commission exhibits are held at the National Archives. Don't know it citizens are allowed to view them. I don't follow your reference to "moving streetlights." So far as I know, none were moved, nor was it necessary to do so to establish the path of Oswald's bullets.

There have been two serious books that support the "official" view written: Gerald Posner's Case Closed and Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History. They really provide balance to the decades of nonsense from so-called researchers. Bugliosi's book is massive. 1500 pages. Footnotes on DVD. It's expensive and a long read but worth it. He answers all the questions.

As I've said, with respect, your self-confessed ignorance as to what happeed, and your suspicions about the validity of the "official" version aren't evidence. But if you haven't read anything that supports the "official" version, you're doing yourself a disservice. When Posner undertook writing Case Closed he discovered there was no reliable index of the 26 volumes of Warren Commission research. The official 800 page summary was indexed, but not the 26 volumes. The only index available had been created by an early conspiracist named Sylvia Meagher, and her index reflected her biases. Subsequent conspiracists used her flawed index to go down the same rabbit holes. So Posner had to start by creating a new index.

One thing conspiracists do repeatedly is simply to ignore evidence which doesn't support their theories. For instance, the 3 SBD employees who were watching the motorcade on the 5th floor, directly below Oswald. They all described hearing three shots, a rifle cycling and shells hitting the floor. There's photographic proof they were there. Their accuracy and veracity has never been challenged. But conspiracists studiously ignore mentioning them. Just as they do the eye witnesses who saw Oswald firing out of that window. Conspiracists love to make a big point of asking "how did Dallas PD get a description of Oswald on the radio so quickly?" Answer: Howard Brennan and a teenager named Amos Euins told the cops they'd seen a guy shooting out of that window and offered a general description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QwH_5umBZM

Please pay no attention to Jim Garrison or JFK or Oliver Stone (I fear it may be too late). Although I liked the movie, it's a tissue of lies, misinformation, exaggerations, half truths and rumors all stitched together by a first rate polemicist. Garrison was completely in the pocket of New Orleans mob boss Carlos Marcello. In his two terms as DA, Garrison brought not a single organized crime case. Not one. In the movie, Kevin Costner makes the impassioned closing argument for the state. In truth, Garrison wasn't there. And the jury took just a few minutes to find Clay Shaw not guilty.

So there's plenty of information out there that will put that sad event in context. But relying on suspicion, skepticism, surmise and speculation (none of which is evidence) will leave you wondering, where none is appropriate. You may not be convinced. But you might be enlightened just a bit.

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

Given that J. Edgar Hoover was still very much in charge of the FBI in 1963, I'm inclined to believe it.

There's no question Hoover trying to ameliorate the damage to the Bureau's reputation when word began to leak out that it had had some contact with Oswald prior to the shooting. So to that extent there was a coverup. But none of Hoover's machinations could make the rifle Owald's, could create ear and eye witnesses who described shots coming from the sixth floor, could cause Oswald to be the only SBD employee to leave that day, could cause Oswald to do what any "innocent" man would do, go to his rooming house and get his pistol, cause him to shoot Officer Tippet or cause him to attempt to shoot the officers arresting him in the Texas Theatre.

As PBS showed (was it Monday?) the fact that Oswald was murdered obscures the fact that it took DPD only about an hour and a half to arrest the guy who killed the president and Officer Tippet. Ordinarily, really good police work.

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

with regard to the handling of the rifle...man I'm very surprised anyone's prints could be lifted with any veracity at all when you've had at least from what I can tell from the NatGeo video 3-5 guys handling the rifle with bare hands

I ask again, are you suggesting someone else brought Oswald's rifle to the SBD and fired it? I think this is as good a place as any to apply Occam's Razor.

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

They were illegal, that is true. And this book...it really does not pull punches for or against the gub'ment, nor the Mob.

Don't forget, the Kennedy brothers had enlisted the aid of the mob in killing Castro (Operation Mongoose). And Chicago mob boss Momo Giancana was in on the planning to kill Castro and was also effectively pimping for JFK with Judith Campbell, who acted as a go between. When word of that alliance to kill Castro was made public (along with other matters) the outfit had Momo and Johnny Roselli whacked.

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

They were illegal, that is true. And this book...it really does not pull punches for or against the gub'ment, nor the Mob.

But what evidence is offered to support the notion that the mob had anything to do with the killing? I recall years ago some idiot came forward with a totally unbelievable story about how Carlos Marcello talked in front of him about "removing this stone from my shoe." And he lived to tell the tale?

And if it was the mob. Then that must mean it wasn't Castro, CIA, rogue elements in the pentagon, Secret Service agents, Corsican drug dealers, George de Mohrenschildt, etc. Right? And they hired a noodnik like Oswald to do their dirty work? Seriously? I know that Blakey of the House Assassinations Committee believes it was the mob. IMO, the evidence is thin. Inference. Supposition. Speculation. But no more. Nothing you could take to a grand jury.

[Old Pio]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

The other officer was J. D. Tippit. From Wiki

I took Flag's post as tongue in cheek. Especially the reference to Dorothy Kilgallen. The only thing she knew for certain (and she learned it too late) is not to mix scotch with barbiturates.

[solovsfett]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

The "government" is making exactly zero effort to convince you. The reality is the opposite of that. The Warren Commission studied the events, issued a report and went out of business. All of its members are now dead. There is no Warren Commission office. No Warren Commission PR people. No Warren Commission press releases. Conspiracists, on the other hand, grow like that stuff that comes out of the cracks of your driveway. And they've been writing and rewriting "history" every since. Some of them even make movies. I find it interesting that only two writers of any prominence have tackled this subject, and both concluded LHO did it and there was no conspiracy. As I mentioned initially, in the 50 years since JFK's murder, the only consensus offered by conspiracists is that Oswald didn't do it. Doesn't it strike you as strange that in half a century they haven't come any closer to coming up with a unified version of what they claim happened than the nonsense they started peddling in 1963?

In recent years the documentaries have tended to support the official version of the event. At least to the extent that they demolish conspiracists' pet theories. There was one on PBS Wednesday night showing that the "magic bullet" could easily have done what was claimed, without any significant damage to the round. Common statements of "fact" from conspiracists: "Oswald didn't have time to make it down the stairs to the lunchroom where he was questioned briefly by a cop." Shown to be absolute nonsense. "Oswald couldn't have made it from his rooming house to where he killed Officer Tippet." Also absolute nonsense. Those walks were recreated and timed for one documentary and they were well within his capabilities. "Oswald was a bad shot" Tripe. "That picture of Oswald with the rifle, pistol and Daily Worker was a photo montage " (an idea featured prominently in JFK). The photography panel of the House Assassinations Committee established that: the photo was not a montage, that it had been taken by Marina's camera (to the exclusion of all other cameras, similar to ballistics) and that Oswald had given an autographed copy of one of the several shots taken in that session to his friend George de Mohrenshildt. If this picture was created to implicate Oswald in a killing of which he was innocent, it seems rather unlikely the CIA (or whoever) would be so careless as to let him get his hands on a copy in advance of the killing. He gave the autographed photo to his friend because he was proud of it and himself.

LOL, that nonsense about Tippet's shooter being heavy set is straight out of JFK, and Oliver Stone, notwithstanding his 50 million dollar budget, is not a reliable source. Oswald was positively identified by 7 or 8 witnesses in lineups that night as the man who shot Tippet. And his pistol was similarly identified as the gun used to kill the officer. Perhaps the most unintentionally funny line in film history occurs in JFK when Donald Sutherland (playing Fletcher Prouty) says to Kevin Costner: (paraphrasing) "I could give you a phony name, but I won't. Just call me Mr. X."

The various Warren Commission exhibits are held at the National Archives. Don't know it citizens are allowed to view them. I don't follow your reference to "moving streetlights." So far as I know, none were moved, nor was it necessary to do so to establish the path of Oswald's bullets.

There have been two serious books that support the "official" view written: Gerald Posner's Case Closed and Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History. They really provide balance to the decades of nonsense from so-called researchers. Bugliosi's book is massive. 1500 pages. Footnotes on DVD. It's expensive and a long read but worth it. He answers all the questions.

As I've said, with respect, your self-confessed ignorance as to what happeed, and your suspicions about the validity of the "official" version aren't evidence. But if you haven't read anything that supports the "official" version, you're doing yourself a disservice. When Posner undertook writing Case Closed he discovered there was no reliable index of the 26 volumes of Warren Commission research. The official 800 page summary was indexed, but not the 26 volumes. The only index available had been created by an early conspiracist named Sylvia Meagher, and her index reflected her biases. Subsequent conspiracists used her flawed index to go down the same rabbit holes. So Posner had to start by creating a new index.

One thing conspiracists do repeatedly is simply to ignore evidence which doesn't support their theories. For instance, the 3 SBD employees who were watching the motorcade on the 5th floor, directly below Oswald. They all described hearing three shots, a rifle cycling and shells hitting the floor. There's photographic proof they were there. Their accuracy and veracity has never been challenged. But conspiracists studiously ignore mentioning them. Just as they do the eye witnesses who saw Oswald firing out of that window. Conspiracists love to make a big point of asking "how did Dallas PD get a description of Oswald on the radio so quickly?" Answer: Howard Brennan and a teenager named Amos Euins told the cops they'd seen a guy shooting out of that window and offered a general description.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QwH_5umBZM

Please pay no attention to Jim Garrison or JFK or Oliver Stone (I fear it may be too late). Although I liked the movie, it's a tissue of lies, misinformation, exaggerations, half truths and rumors all stitched together by a first rate polemicist. Garrison was completely in the pocket of New Orleans mob boss Carlos Marcello. In his two terms as DA, Garrison brought not a single organized crime case. Not one. In the movie, Kevin Costner makes the impassioned closing argument for the state. In truth, Garrison wasn't there. And the jury took just a few minutes to find Clay Shaw not guilty.

So there's plenty of information out there that will put that sad event in context. But relying on suspicion, skepticism, surmise and speculation (none of which is evidence) will leave you wondering, where none is appropriate. You may not be convinced. But you might be enlightened just a bit.

gotta run to work soon but I have to ask you some questions here

if you're confident Oswald did it, why do you care the rest of the country isn't with you? What's the difference?

up above you say PBS shows the magic bullet could work and the bullet wouldn't be damaged yet in a prior post you say you saw or read where the bullet was badly damaged. Which is it?

The reference to Tippit's killer comes from Warren Commission testimony that was in the volumes (not the finished book you can find at barnes and noble). Suddenly, 50 years later we've found more witnesses to Tippitt's killing?

As far as only two guys being serious or official writers, who decided that? You? Of the thousands of writers who've tackled this Summers isn't serious? Just the 2 guys you mention and those 2 only who've said Oswald did it?

I recall Posner's interviews in 1993 or 94 and he came across as someone that was extremely angry about the movie JFK, and villified Jim Garrison mercilessly. Well, it's tough to tell now if Garrison's conclusions were close because his witnesses either died during his investigation or within 4-5 years of it, and he's been so alinsky'd by the press (see Mafia/Marcello, well if he didn't prosecute the mafia then he couldn't be right about his JFK investigation...what does one have to do w/the other?) and others that even bringing his name up now sparks ridicule. But regardless, I remember thinking Posner was on a mission to offset (just like say, the guy who wrote High Treason).

Anyway I don't believe LHO just thought this up and acted on his own.

I believe he was part of a group of 3 or 4, or possibly 5 or 6 people who discussed this murder, possibly planned it even. And when he did it he was silenced immediately.

[solovsfett]

Re: 50 years later. And the only consensus is: ABO--anybody but Oswald

I ask again, are you suggesting someone else brought Oswald's rifle to the SBD and fired it? I think this is as good a place as any to apply Occam's Razor.

I'm suggesting one thing and one thing only. With the man-handling of that rifle I wouldn't believe it possible to lift prints. I saw the cops in the video grab the (whatever you call the part you put in your shoulder)...with bare hands. they held the stock with bare hands. I mean 3 or 4 cops in this video so I think about this and I say, no way in hell you get legit prints from that. No way.