Did Daley Plaza change your mind?

Discussion in 'General Military Arms & History Forum' started by polishshooter, May 9, 2007.

Have you toured Dealey Plaza, and do you believe there was a JFK "Conspiracy?"

  1. I HAVE been to Dealey Plaza, the Depository and the Grassy Knoll and think Oswald acted alone.

    7 vote(s)
  2. I HAVE been to Dealey Plaza, seen it all, and STILL believe there was a conspiracy.

    2 vote(s)
  3. I have NOT been to Dealey Plaza, but think Oswald acted alone.

    7 vote(s)
  4. i have NOT been to Dealey Plaza, and still believe there was a conspiracy.

    11 vote(s)
  1. polishshooter

    polishshooter Well-Known Member

    Mar 25, 2001
    Nightfighter, no offfense, but just about everything you cited has been debunked. NOBODY saw a shooter near the Grassy Knoll, and NOBODY heard a shot from there. MUCH later, people changed their stories, but at the time of the shootings, nobody reported it.

    And the film does NOT show ANYONE reacting to the shots, except people directly BELOW the Book Depository, or even in the windows immediately below Oswald, and they are ALL pointing UP at him. It was in the confusion AFTER the shots when you see people running up the Grassy Knoll. And the the people on the overpass,,,they saw NOTHING and were in the best position to see and hear it if it had happened. bUt the kicker is the woman in the hat standing right in any line of fire from the Grassy Knoll at the time Oswald is shooting...she doesn't even MOVE or react at all. The shot would have been 20 yds BEHIND her...

    There was NO reports of "somebody with a rifle" EXCEPT in the Book Depository, at the time of the shooting, again, it was a legend that came later. People quoting other people quoting other people who changed their stories over time.

    The damage to Kennedy's head was ABSOLUTELY consistent with a high velocity bullet entering from the BACK, and TOTALLY inconsitent with a bullet entering from the FRONT. There is a wonderful book written by a forensic doctor that also was a gun nut that examined ALL the medical evidence in both the Lincoln and Kennedy assasinations, and duplicated all the findings with the actual types of guns used on cadavers, and also dummies made up to duplicate the consistency of human skulls and body tissue.

    The part of Kennedy's skull that was blown off was NOT in back, but to the forward quadrant immediately to the right of his eye socket, the weakest part of the skull.

    And his head moved BACKWARDS after the head shot (actually back and slightly to the side" JUST like it should have, when the hydraulic pressure built up to a point it was no longer contained by the scalp, and it reacted to the hydraulic jet caused when the pressure was relieved through the skull separating where it did.

    (I apologize for the graphic detail, but really EVERYTHING has been explained in great detail, and is only NOT accepted by those people who are simply "Conspiracy Nuts," God love 'em.)

    You can duplicate the test with a watermelon, wrapped in enough duct tape to simulate the scalp, put it on a stool, and shoot it with ANY high powered rifle with a FMJ bullet from 60 yds or so... 10 out of 10 times the melon will fall off TOWARDS the shooter....that is the one thing cited the most by conspiracy nuts that is the EASIEST to disprove, that 'Kennedy's head could only have moved that way from a shot to the FRONT." Wrong. It would have moved the OPPOSITE way.

    You really have to get to Dealy Plaza, Nightfighter, it WILL change your mind.

    There really ISN'T "so much evidence, eye witnesses, contradictory evidence, that suggest that there could very well have been one. more than one shooter = a conspiracy."

    While ANY investigation has "loose ends," but the Kennedy Assassination actually has LESS "loose ends" than most. The second Government inquiry years later was a farce, admitting witness testimony that CONTRADICTED earlier testimony FROM THE SAME PEOPLE (for money? Fame?) plus the faulty "sound tests" that did not duplicate the actual event, which fueled the "Conspiracy Industry" to simply sell books and movies to the gullible.

    With all due respect, get over it, Oswald acted ALONE. And it has been PROVEN.
    Last edited: May 6, 2008
  2. Vladimir congratulations on your debate victory! But the conspiricy side has it easy. They can continualy bring up new theories with little or no evidence and over whelm the other side.

    But the vast majority of the different conspiricy theories under pinnings can be knocked down by facts.

    When opposing the conspiricy theory crowd it is like playing "wack a mole". You wack down one, they come up with another.

  3. polishshooter

    polishshooter Well-Known Member

    Mar 25, 2001
    Yeah, Vlad, and 17th, I learned that a long time ago in college, in a "Public Speaking-Pre-law" class our supposedly "Final" grade was to pick a notorious criminal in History, and either "Prosecute" or 'Defend." Each Day over tha last three weeks was devoted to "your" trial, with the rest of the class as jury, and the Prof as judge.

    Everybody picked individuals, like Lizzie Borden, Al Capone, Charles manson, whatever, I picked defending the Ohio National Guard over the "Kent State Massacre."

    And we ALL nailed our cases, IRON CLAD, EVERY one of us got unanimous verdicts in our favor...until we noticed we had a week left in class...:cool:

    The professor then said, "Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you, now you have to do it AGAIN, only this time same case, if you PROSECUTED you now DEFEND, or vice-versa....":eek:

    You should have HEARD the groans, we had ALL covered all the bases, we THOUGHT...

    I even had to change the premise on mine since I had done such a "good job" securing their exoneration, to "Get the Conviction", I actually prosecuted the Commanding General of the ONG for "failing to provide adequate Riot Control Training to inadequately trained troops only trained in Basic Combat Techniques,'and "for issueng live ammo" or some such nonsense, I was lucky he allowed it.

    BUT it opened my eyes to arguments, you have to study not only YOURS but you have to listen to THEIRS. (and sometimes no matter where your "heart" is, THEIRS are the better arguments....)

    (And I also learned the fickleness of juries, a WEAK argument delivered eloquently by a popular person will many times WIN over the STRONG argument weakly delivered by someone nobody likes....:p ....God knows I SOMETIMES fall into that last category when I argue, so I beat my head against walls once in a while too;):p:D)
  4. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    So you say, but you do not provide any links or footnotes, so all I have to go on is your opinion. An that of the Airman, who in an interview told of how the shot made his ears ring, a man with a badge confinscated his film.
    This assumes that the if a gun were fired from the grassy knoll it was one that would produce enough muzzle blast that people near by would be uncomfortable. There are guns (.22 Hornet, et.al.) that produce little muzzle blast and report.

    On the day of the assassination, I remember news reporters talking about how several people pointed to the top of the grassy knoll to indicate to a motorcycle policeman where the shots had come from.
    This is all well and good, but the I saw an interview with the doctor who was trying to treat Kennedy, who insisted that the back of his skull was blown off...not the front. He was a witness to what he observed (has never changed his story), and is not a "Consipiracy Nut".
    If you accept the Walter Reed autopsy, this would be relevant, however, again, I watched an interview with one of the Walter Reed doctors who stated that unidentified persons in plain cloths were "clearly in charge" of the autopsy, and stopped the doctors several times from completing the customary procedures. Thus, even the doctors at Walter Reed were not satisfied with the autopsy results.
    If I went to Ford Theater, would my mind be changed about the Lincoln assassination? Booth obviously acted alone because it was an easy jump from Lincolns box to the stage? In fact was that assassination not a conspiracy?

    There is enough that none of my questions that I have about the incident.
    Now I have your assurance unsupported by any evidence (just your opionion). In all due respect, I just want the questions answered, hopefuly by the principals involved before they are all dead (which may of course be too late).
  5. Space aliens, hired by the CIA, killed Kennedy, doesn't everyone know that? The Carcano rifle bullets were merely window dressing planted by the Dallas police and Lyndon Johnson. :D;):p
  6. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    There are two likely scenarios. The first, Oswald acted alone. The second, it was some kind of conspiracy. I have too many questions that have never been answered to make a definitive conclusion as to which.

    For instance, a Carcano bullet was found laying on a stretcher that transported the Governor to the hospital. In all your shooting experience (anyone?) have you ever found a bullet that went through a deer, boar, moose, anything, laying on the ground? The rarity of that happening should at the very least suggest that it is just possible that someone placed it there.

    Another question: Why was Oswald holding a newspaper when he was photographed(the one where he stated that it was his head superimposed upon someone else)? Why would anyone hold up a newspaper? For what possible purpose? In folklore, it is used to establish a date...however, in that case the newspaper was folded and the headline could not be read.

    Why did Ruby keep insisting that he could not talk in the Dallas police environment and begged to be taken to D.C. where he would be safe?

    Why did telephone records indicate that Ruby's calls to the Mafia in Chicago increased by several hundred percent just before the assassination?

    Who were the three well dressed and atypical (clean shaven young adults, 30ish) hobos found in the railroad car just after the assassination?

    If a person cannot come up with many questions about the strange things that happened in relation to the assassination, they do not have an inquiring nature.

    I am not saying a conspiracy did exist, but without the many questions being answered I sure cannot state without reservation that it did not. Unless of course, it was space aliens as you say. I thought that this was a serious discussion.
  7. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    John Wilkes Booth in a conspiracy with several other people killed Abraham Lincoln, and conspired to kill Sec. of War Stanton at the same time.

    Among those several persons tried and convicted and hanged was Mary Serrat. Sentenced to life in prison was a Doctor Mudd, who set Booth's broken leg (and later became a hero for his attempts to save the prisoners and the garrison of prison from yellow fever).

    Sometimes there is a lone assassin, sometimes there is a conspiracy. Absolutes is the realm of the foolish.
  8. polishshooter

    polishshooter Well-Known Member

    Mar 25, 2001
    NIghtfighter, I don't need to footnote any of my facts, they are THE facts, if you care to look them up. I HAVE, and I don't need to prove anything to ANYONE. People have already DONE that for me, all I had to do was listen with my head and not my heart. And I don't mean that to be as mean as it sounds, REALLY I enjoy your passion, but it is better spent elsewhere. Oswald did it, alone. Open your mind and read more than the accounts of people that AGREE with you. Many of your sources quote each OTHER if you look closely.

    I TOO argued for years there HAD to be a conspiracy, and I TOO quoted a lot of half truths and stuff I WANTED to believe was true...UNTIL I went to Dealey Plaza, and the light bulbs went off, seeing the entire set up. I used to picture it in my mind, from the footage...it's MUCH "cozier" then that. I WALKED the grassy knoll, I LOOKED at the Xs in the street! I even bought some "rags" from conspiracy nuts on the street! It was standing in the winow NEXT to the one Oswald shot from, looking down at the "X" in the street, where the warm feeling of relief, and KNOWLEDGE, washed over me for the first time! THEN I started to (re?)read the truth...as well as SEE it for the first time. I'm BEGGING you, go, and then we'll resume the conversation....

    It is so EASY to believe the crap, to believe the conspiracy nuts, HOW could the Leader of the FREE WORLD be killed so easily by a nut with a crappy $19.95 ITALIAN rifle (OK, $24.95 W/scope) My GOD man, Oswald got the job WEEKS before Kennedy even THOUGHT he was going to Dallas, much less anyone else. GREAT conspiracy! Plant your "patsy" BEFORE you know where the target is going to be!

    Think MAN! HOW do you get two or more rifles to go off EXACTLY at the same time, so only THREE shots are heard, HOW do you make sure ONLY three bullets are recovered? When it is PROVED Oswald fired THREE TIMES???

    COMMON SENSE leads you to the truth when you are there, the FACTS merely CONFIRM it.

    EVERY one of your arguments is bogus, or a myth, or have been refuted. Period.

    The bullet? EXPLAINED. IN DETAIL,you just have to LISTEN.

    It passed through Kennedy's neck, touched his spine, throat, esophagus, then through Connally's back, ribs, thorax, exited under his diaphram, entered his arm, deflected off bone, and came to rest just piercing his other arm. Where it fell out on the gurney in the rush by people NOT already engaged in trying to save Kennedy to get him into surgery after transferring him from the gurney.. ABSOLUTELY consistent with his wounds and ballistics of the round and what it went through, and absolutely believable to any ballistics expert for a mid-power at best 6.5 mm Carcano FMJ. AND contrary to other myths, it was NOT "pristine," there are pictures of it everywhere you'd care to look, both under microscopes and naked, bearing the scars, scrapes and even the slightly bent nose you can see with the naked eye, that you would expect for it's construction, it's velocity at that range, from a carbine length barrel, and what it did. AND it was duplicated in tests MANY times since!

    WHY won't you BELIEVE it??? THAT is where you need some introspection...

    And Lincoln, YES it WAS a conspiracy...that unraveled in WEEKS if not DAYS!
    NOT still a "mystery" (to some!) for 65 YEARS!!!!

    I've read a lot about that one too....:cool:
  9. All kidding aside (I really WAS kidding in the above post guys! :eek::D), there will always be conspiracy theories after any assassination of a public figure; it's the nature of the beast. Such theories invariably develop mostly because all facts can never be known, and remote possibilities will always be imaginable, even when the evidence points overpoweringly to the accepted explanation. Conclusions about assassinations are, by their very nature, inductive conclusions, never deductive ones, i.e., they are conclusions based on logical probabilities, not logical certainties. Even if Oswald had stood in the middle of Daley Plaza with his Carcano, in front of a 1,000 onlookers, all with cameras rolling, and managed to put three 6.5mm holes through Kennedy's forehead in broad daylight, there would still be those who said it was a conspiracy and that Kennedy was "really" shot from the "grassy knoll," a street sewer drain, the Book Depository, or possibly the Moon. ;) Logically, only Occam's Razor is reasonable to apply here:

    "The explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", or 'entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity'".
  10. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    Polishshooter, I am confused by the emotion in response to my pointing out the inconsistancies of the Kennedy assisionation. Surely when you posted your original post, you must have expected that there would be responses such as mine that would disagree with your conclusion. If I remember correctly, you asked for peoples responses. Did you just want responses that agreed?
    I do not understand the emotion of your last couple of posts...I never intended to anger anyone.:confused:
  11. Nightfighter, you have to remember that Polish is the passionate intelectual type!:):) And you may have caught him on an evening when he was at the Polish Vodka!:eek:

    I can understand the passion on both sides.

    On the pro conspiricy side it is hard to believe that a low life looser like Oswald could pull off the "Murder of the Century". (forgeting about the Archduke Ferdinand)

    On the anti conspiricy side it is aggravating to have all these crazy ideas to knock down. There are so many it boggles the mind. Most were concoted well after the events.

    People want the whole thing tied up in nice box. But in any investigation there are loose ends. Years latter people's memories fade.

    History channel, and the Discovery Channel have both had excellent documentries on the murder:

    1. I remember one thing they brought up was the claim that Oswald couldn't have walked the distance (it may have been the distance from his boarding house to the bus stop) he was claimed to have. They timed a man wlaking the route, and walking at a fast but reasoanble pace he was able to do it.

    2. They also had one of the pictures showing a supposed additional gun man. The picture was very fuzzy. To me it could have been the lock ness monster, or big foot, the picture was so bad. They used the same type of camera, with the same type of film and took a picture of the same location at the same time of day same weather conditions. On their film you could see what might have been the grainy out line of a man holding something. At the time they took the picture there was no one there!
  12. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    I have no particular theory to promote. I just do not like unanswered questions and loose ends.

    For instance Oswald had his picture taken with his Carcano and a newspaper. (Although he stated that it was his face superimposed on someone else, his wife stated that she remembered taking the picture.) I drew the logical inference that it might have been an attempt to document something. But if he wanted to be famous or infamous, why did he deny shooting Kennedy? This was his chance for immortality. Why did he not seize it? Leaving his rifle behind would surely have resulted in his eventual capture...did he think he could have gotten away with it?

    Oswald also stated that it would be pointless to kill the president because he would be replaced with someone who would likely maintain the same political policies. If not immortality, what did he wish to gain?

    With the Secret Service in attendance and overseeing the Walter Reed autopsy, how did the brain disappear?
  13. Nightfighter tying up some loose ends.

    When trying to understand Oswald you have to understand that he was:

    1.Not a particularly bright individual, with illusions of grandeur. He had attempted to kill retired Army General Walker, a right wing leader 7 months earlier. He was frustrated by his low wage job at the book depository. Killing President Kennedy certainly made him famous.

    2. Goofy. He went in the U.S. Marines, and yet went around spouting all kinds of marxist theory. He "defected" to Russia, attempted to commit suicide when they wouldn't let him stay. Because of this the Soviets alowed him to stay. Then a few years latter he decided to come back to the U.S. After being back in the U.S. he talked to his wife of returning to the U.S.S.R. Most of the men who served with him described him as "weired", or '"strange".

    On Oswald's claim of innocence, he may have not wanted to suffer the consequences of his actions. If found guilty of the murders of President Kennedy and Dallas Police Officer Tippit he would have been exicuted.

    The brain? I don't know what happened to it.
  14. nightfighter

    nightfighter New Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    It is often stated that he was the one who shot at General Walker, but he had never been charged with that and that did not come to light until after the Kennedy assassination.
    When I watched interviews with Oswald he did not strike me as being a dullard. He seemed not only bright but articulate. He managed to teach himself Russian so well that when he met his future Russian wife, he spoke so perfectly that she stated she thought he was a Russian. That in itself is quite a trick in that almost all people with have a heavy accent when they speak a "learned" second language.
    "...spouting all kinds of Marxist theory..."
    I saw an interview with him in New Orleans after the "fair play for Cuba" incident. He was well read in the area in that he knew the difference between Marxism, Socialism, Communism, etc. He had obviously read the books and could differentiate among the theories. Very few people can actually do that, they just call all those: "communism."

    2) However, on this point I agree. His behavior was very strange when he was a marine. In one incident, a small handgun (which he was not allowed to have in the barracks),he had hidden in his locker fell out and discharged. It is documented that other marines picked on him because of his strangeness and interest in reading a Russian newspaper...they called him "comrade Oswald."

    He was quite the enigma.
  15. TeeHee65

    TeeHee65 New Member

    Nov 10, 2010
    Sorry folks, but I guess I have to agree with just about everyone who has posted on this one - to some degree at least. Below is part of a reply I made to another thread just an hour or so ago.....

    Very interesting that I should join this forum and then "trip over" this thread an hour or so later. I was a 16 year old high school Junior in November of 1963. The Kennedy assination & Lee Harvey Oswald were THE big deal for our generation, and I guess I was one of the many who didn't buy the official story. It just seemed too easy to be believable.

    In 1967 I bought an Italian 6.5 Mannlicher Carcano rifle at a pawn shop for the outrageous price of $10 - including a box of ammo. At that time I was a "self proclaimed" expert marksman and I proved (to myself) that nobody could have done what Oswald was supposed to have done. IT JUST COULDN'T BE DONE! Now, some 43 years later, I guess I'll admit that maybe I wasn't quite as good as I thought I was. I still can't make myself buy into the official version of the assination 100%.
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010