Did Lee Harvey Oswald kill JFK?
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
I am in complete agreement with Bill on this one, I think Harvey was the sole conspirator.
Its like a wise man once said "The only way that three people can keep a secret is if two of them are dead".
bill
The guy shooting from the grassy knoll is another big joke if I ever heard one. If that was true,then why are all those people running UP the grassy knoll toward the shooter instead of running in the opposite direction in order to get out of the line of fire??? If ever Im standing on a street somewhere and somebody starts shooting,Im going to run as far away from him as I can,not try to go up to him and say hello. Where is the comman sense???
The guy shooting from the grassy knoll is another big joke if I ever heard one. If that was true,then why are all those people running UP the grassy knoll toward the shooter instead of running in the opposite direction in order to get out of the line of fire??? If ever Im standing on a street somewhere and somebody starts shooting,Im going to run as far away from him as I can,not try to go up to him and say hello. Where is the comman sense???
captiva303
Active member
i watched a show where they replicated the conditions and the official story was the only shot that was possible(without the shot being obstructed the first lady dieing or the governor dieing or someone or something getting in the way).
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
"nonadjustable rear sight" says it all as far as I am concerned.
During my Army service, I qualified Expert with every weapon I fired ... (Including sniper quals with the M21 Sniper Rifle (7.62mm Rifle w/Optical Sight)). There is NO WAY that Oswald could have made the shots that they said he did. He 'might' have made the first shot .. but .. there is no way that he was going to make multiple shots and maintain the accuracy with those rotten iron sights that his weapon mounted. Even with the M21, I would have been very hard pressed to make the multiple shots that the Warren Commission stated that Oswald made. A moving target, going away and shooting down hill -
I CAN'T THINK OF A HARDER TARGET TO HAVE SCORED MULTIPLE HITS ON ... ESPECIALLY SINCE THE WEAPON WAS BOLT ACTION WITH ROTTEN IRON SIGHTS.
Did Oswald carry out the assassination alone - I am skeptical. Considering the weapon they said he used, I don't see how he could have. He WAS a scapegoat ... considering the times and the place, they needed to solve this crime quickly. Oswald made a very good scapegoat (even if he WAS involved).
BTW - I should have said that I never had a chance to put my Sniper Training to work. I re-enlisted out of the MOS area that would have activated the sniper designation. I got into electronics at a much higher pay scale.
BTW - I should have said that I never had a chance to put my Sniper Training to work. I re-enlisted out of the MOS area that would have activated the sniper designation. I got into electronics at a much higher pay scale.
Last edited:
bill
Well,..There they go again with that same old "Theres no way Oswald could have made them shots with that old cheap rifle" jazz. GET REAL!! The distance between the sixth floor window and the spot where Kennedy was when the final shot was fired is only about 260 feet. It wouldnt take an expert marksman with a precision rifle to score 2 hits out of 3 trys at that distance. A guy with a high dollar slingshot and a bag of marbles could score those hits.
Well,..There they go again with that same old "Theres no way Oswald could have made them shots with that old cheap rifle" jazz. GET REAL!! The distance between the sixth floor window and the spot where Kennedy was when the final shot was fired is only about 260 feet. It wouldnt take an expert marksman with a precision rifle to score 2 hits out of 3 trys at that distance. A guy with a high dollar slingshot and a bag of marbles could score those hits.
Czin
Active member
My opinion is that you should ignore anything the history channel tells you when it concerns conspiracy theories.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
200 feet or 200 yards ... makes no difference ......
Bill ............
200 feet or 200 yards ... makes no difference. Oswald was notoriously a bad shot .. someone that knew him at that time, said he couldn't have hit the broadside of a barn if he had been standing inside the barn (there was historical information available that bore this out) - so how could he have fired off the number of rounds as quickly and as accurately as has been asserted, using a weapon that had the reputation of being totally inaccurate as this weapon model had???
While I have to agree that the History Channel airs numerous conspiracy stories that are bogus to say the least (my opinion), the assassination of Lincoln and the Assassination of Kennedy 'might' just have some validity to them .. there is so much unexplained information/questions about these events to assure everyone of the accuracy of the reports, etc.
[Especially ... who was actually involved in the conspiracy if there really was one???].
Note: Corrected the misspelling in the quote.
Bill ............
200 feet or 200 yards ... makes no difference. Oswald was notoriously a bad shot .. someone that knew him at that time, said he couldn't have hit the broadside of a barn if he had been standing inside the barn (there was historical information available that bore this out) - so how could he have fired off the number of rounds as quickly and as accurately as has been asserted, using a weapon that had the reputation of being totally inaccurate as this weapon model had???
a Kennedy assassination site said:
While I have to agree that the History Channel airs numerous conspiracy stories that are bogus to say the least (my opinion), the assassination of Lincoln and the Assassination of Kennedy 'might' just have some validity to them .. there is so much unexplained information/questions about these events to assure everyone of the accuracy of the reports, etc.
[Especially ... who was actually involved in the conspiracy if there really was one???].
Note: Corrected the misspelling in the quote.
What historical information? He qualified once as a sharpshooter, and once as a marksman while he was a Marine. He practiced with the weapon after he purchased it. This shot has been re-enacted to death, with the same conclusion time and time again.....it wasn`t that difficult of a shot.
Look at stills taken from the film. They clearly show the back of his head intact, and a large flap hanging down from the top of his head.
bill
Also,if you look at the close-up of frames 312 and 313, you can see Kennedys head being thrusted forward and his back moving forward away from the backrest of his seat before his head recoiled back and to the left. Not only that,If the shot would have came from the grassy knoll, it would have entered the right side Kennedys head thus blowing the left side of his head out and most likely taking out the First Lady too in the process.
Also,if you look at the close-up of frames 312 and 313, you can see Kennedys head being thrusted forward and his back moving forward away from the backrest of his seat before his head recoiled back and to the left. Not only that,If the shot would have came from the grassy knoll, it would have entered the right side Kennedys head thus blowing the left side of his head out and most likely taking out the First Lady too in the process.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
ISN'T SCIENCE FICTION FUN???
As far as the historical information I quoted, you can find every possible second of the shooting taken apart and have as many different takes as to what happened. Along with that, the history that covers Oswald, suffers that same kind of interpretation.
There are millions and millions of Americans alive that were around when Kennedy was murdered, and every single one can remember what they were doing at that time ... and ... every person has their own rock hard belief as to what happened.
BOTTOM LINE: The assassination of Kennedy (the same for Lincoln), will remain a completely unknown/unproven mystery beyond a shadow of a doubt (until a science is invented that allows us to view history through a magic window and see real history as a series of pictures).
ISN'T SCIENCE FICTION FUN???
As far as the historical information I quoted, you can find every possible second of the shooting taken apart and have as many different takes as to what happened. Along with that, the history that covers Oswald, suffers that same kind of interpretation.
There are millions and millions of Americans alive that were around when Kennedy was murdered, and every single one can remember what they were doing at that time ... and ... every person has their own rock hard belief as to what happened.
BOTTOM LINE: The assassination of Kennedy (the same for Lincoln), will remain a completely unknown/unproven mystery beyond a shadow of a doubt (until a science is invented that allows us to view history through a magic window and see real history as a series of pictures).
ISN'T SCIENCE FICTION FUN???
mmarsh
Active member
He was rated as a sharpshooter but was downgraded to marksmen. making him a decent but not expert shooter. But thats what the Marines wrote. The guys that served with him and knew him well at boot camp said he couldn't hit the broadside of a barn at 5 yards.
To do the type of shooting that killed Kennedy while not impossible, would be difficult even for a master.
Moving Target, at range, target moving away from the shooter, 3 shots in 6-8 sec from a poor quality bolt action rifle with a broken scope. From a shooter rated poor to fair.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
I don't agree, there has been enough ballistics work done since the event to prove the one shooter case.
Any other permeations of "grassy knoll" shots or "railway bridge" shots all end up with them having to shoot through the First Lady or into the First Lady, side shots are simply not viable, frontal shots have them shooting through the wind screen of the vehicle and we know that didn't happen so all that is left is a rear shot.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
Which is what I wrote ...
Oswald couldn't have hit the broad-side of a barn had he been inside the barn.
Again.....this shot has been studied probably more than any shot in history. The same conclusion is invariably reached....it was not a terribly difficult shot. Why do you discount what "The Marines said" ? You would rather take the word of some "guys" that he couldn`t shoot? Especially ones interviewed after the fact when they have a chance to add to the mystery by stating that he couldn`t shoot?