By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Was shot 50 years ago today and I can't believe we haven't had a conspiraloony threads about grassy knolls, CIA cover ups, mafia hits, Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't hit a cows @rse with shovel etc.
If man evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys?
So how come the United States Select Committee on Assasinations,a government enquiry in 1979 concluded there was more than one gunman and the original Warren report in 1964 was seriously flawed.
How do you explain there was multiple angle shots taken simultaneously at JFK some in a horizontal angle.that cannot be done by a lone gunman. There were more than the three bullets reportedly fired by Oswald.
Public opinion polls taken after the assassination have indicated that a large number of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy. These same polls also show that there is no agreement on who else may have been involved. A 2003 Gallup poll reported that 75% of Americans do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. That same year an ABC News poll found that 70% of respondents suspected that the assassination involved more than one person. A 2004 Fox News poll found that 66% of Americans thought there had been a conspiracy while 74% thought there had been a cover-up. Try and have a look at some of this video even fast forward it in parts but try to get some understanding of the misinformation and contradictions of the original Warren report.
Some senior people have even said the original tape was taken away at the time and edited to suit the CIA explanation.
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
"So how come the United States Select Committee on Assasinations,a government enquiry in 1979 concluded there was more than one gunman and the original Warren report in 1964 was seriously flawed."
The committee came to that conclusion based on the scientific acoustic evidence of an microphone on one of the police motorcycles which suggested four shots which would suggest a second gunman as Oswald only fired 3 shots. This coupled with a small percentage of eyewitness testimony that shots may have been fired from grassy knoll led them to conclude there was a high probability of a second gunman and therefore a conspiracy.
However, the scientific acoustic evidence was, at best, flawed.
The National Research Council Committee on Ballistic Acoustics, who studied the acoustic evidence a few years later, conluded that,
"– The acoustic analyses do not demonstrate that there was a grassy knoll shot, and in particular there is no acoustic basis for the claim of 95% probability of such a shot. – The acoustic impulses attributed to gunshots were recorded about one minute after the President had been shot and the motorcade had been instructed to go to the hospital. – Therefore, reliable acoustic data do not support a conclusion that there was a second gunman"
And more specifically on the probability of a shot being fired from the grassy knoll,
"The BRSW/WA conclusion of a 95% probability of a shot or loud noise from the grassy knoll fails to be convincing because (i) the use of subjective procedures which easily lead one to unconsciously biased reporting and make it difficult to reproduce the results by independent observers, (ii) serious errors in statistical reasoning which render the calculated probabilities meaningless, and (iii) the failure to apply the WA methodology to the other suspected shots which leaves the method insufficently tested and calibrated"
"How do you explain there was multiple angle shots taken simultaneously at JFK some in a horizontal angle.that cannot be done by a lone gunman. There were more than the three bullets reportedly fired by Oswald."
There is zero evidence to support that there were multiple shots taken and this directly contradicts the United States Select Committee on Assasinations enquiry in any case.
3 Shots were fired, 3 bullets were found all them of matching Oswald's rifle. All the injuries inflicted in Dealey Plaza can be explained by those 3 bullets.
If there was a hale of gun fire coming in from multiple angles then there would of been a lot more bullets found with a lot more dead and wounded people than there were.
"Public opinion polls taken after the assassination have indicated that a large number of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy. These same polls also show that there is no agreement on who else may have been involved. A 2003 Gallup poll reported that 75% of Americans do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. That same year an ABC News poll found that 70% of respondents suspected that the assassination involved more than one person. A 2004 Fox News poll found that 66% of Americans thought there had been a conspiracy while 74% thought there had been a cover-up. Try and have a look at some of this video even fast forward it in parts but try to get some understanding of the misinformation and contradictions of the original Warren report. "
More than 25% of people think that Princess Diana was murdered and around 50% think there was a cover up. Around 30% of people think Dr David Kelly was murdered, around 25% of people worldwide think the moon landings were fake, a similar number think 9/11 was an inside job etc. etc.
Opinion polls prove nothing I'm afraid.
If man evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys?
Bill Hicks had a brilliant mind and was such a funny guy.
For this type of forum I m trying to keep it light hearted.next I was going to put up the cast of Seinfeld and their sketch outlining how ridiculous the official story is.
I could be here all week posting more serious scientific credible evidence especially about the ballistics of the subject.
But alas,as I seem to be the only one against many it s best if I keep it simple and humorous.
I m glad we re having a proper exchange of views and it has nt descended into the usual ....
There is plenty of room for debate on the subject and to suggest that the conspiracy is complete rubbish is just not true.
We had a lecture series last week as part of the 50th anniversary of his assassination and my lecturers still have heated debates about it.
The problem with the whole topic is how much Oliver Stones narrative has dominated the conspiracy theory. Oliver Stone raises some interesting questions but he fudges more than a few facts in his telling of the event.
In instances where you have a challenge to the official narrative or "conspiracy theory" the state has no option to deny a conspiracy. This is because because either said allegations are completely false or they just got caught out red handed. Regardless of what might have actually happened the states version of events on anything is going to carry much more weight than what a few people on the internet are saying. The state gets the backing of the established media and has the general compliance of its citizens which reinforces everything they say. Journalists who challenge the state on anything get a very rough rap so its not in for example Penn and Tellers best interest to go against the government. They risk losing their career over it. However this isn't to say they are factually incorrect or part of a conspiracy as some might suggest.
There is a lot of misinformation flying around on both sides but JFKs untimely death benefited a lot of powerful and wealthy people. The Warren commission was a pisspoor investigation but it certainly wasn't invalidated by Oliver Stone.
There is plenty of room for debate on the subject and to suggest that the conspiracy is complete rubbish is just not true.
We had a lecture series last week as part of the 50th anniversary of his assassination and my lecturers still have heated debates about it.
The problem with the whole topic is how much Oliver Stones narrative has dominated the conspiracy theory. Oliver Stone raises some interesting questions but he fudges more than a few facts in his telling of the event.
In instances where you have a challenge to the official narrative or "conspiracy theory" the state has no option to deny a conspiracy. This is because because either said allegations are completely false or they just got caught out red handed. Regardless of what might have actually happened the states version of events on anything is going to carry much more weight than what a few people on the internet are saying. The state gets the backing of the established media and has the general compliance of its citizens which reinforces everything they say. Journalists who challenge the state on anything get a very rough rap so its not in for example Penn and Tellers best interest to go against the government. They risk losing their career over it. However this isn't to say they are factually incorrect or part of a conspiracy as some might suggest.
There is a lot of misinformation flying around on both sides but JFKs untimely death benefited a lot of powerful and wealthy people. The Warren commission was a pisspoor investigation but it certainly wasn't invalidated by Oliver Stone.
A very intelligent comment.
It is very difficult for anyone to put forward an alternative explanation to the state.
Despite very credible people,some of whom were there at the time or close to Kennedy or the CIA etc putting forward their views it is difficult for their arguments to carry weight because of the governments stance.
The organisations and writers of reports confirming the governments version of events are normally funded and briefed by the state itself. Without this kind of backing they could not survive.They are very much told what to do or at least persuaded to take a certain viewpoint.
Also,public access has been denied on the case and evidence. For instance in 1996 the public for the first time were given access to all the original documents of the time. The problem being the departments of the CIA and FBI were given at least 18 months warning to clean everything up in advance.
Another theory of course is that Oswald was innocent and had nothing to do with the shooting,he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the snipers nest etc was placed there in advance.He was framed but unfortunately he got assassinated also before he could testify in court and defend himself.There are plenty of credible people who have come forward to support this theory with some very convincing evidence.
Who knows...
[Post edited 27 Nov 2013 16:32]
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
It is very difficult for anyone to put forward an alternative explanation to the state.
Despite very credible people,some of whom were there at the time or close to Kennedy or the CIA etc putting forward their views it is difficult for their arguments to carry weight because of the governments stance.
The organisations and writers of reports confirming the governments version of events are normally funded and briefed by the state itself. Without this kind of backing they could not survive.They are very much told what to do or at least persuaded to take a certain viewpoint.
Also,public access has been denied on the case and evidence. For instance in 1996 the public for the first time were given access to all the original documents of the time. The problem being the departments of the CIA and FBI were given at least 18 months warning to clean everything up in advance.
Another theory of course is that Oswald was innocent and had nothing to do with the shooting,he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the snipers nest etc was placed there in advance.He was framed but unfortunately he got assassinated also before he could testify in court and defend himself.There are plenty of credible people who have come forward to support this theory with some very convincing evidence.
Who knows...
[Post edited 27 Nov 2013 16:32]
Oswald being shot by Jack Ruby was incredibly unfortunate or lucky depending on how you look at it.
Both men had a colourful history that fuel the conspiracy theories to this day.
LHO was more than just an angry communist, ex marine lone nut and Jack Ruby was not just an outraged citizen. The razor is usually right but when applied to this case andwhen you contextualise these mens history, the lone nut gunned down by the outraged citizen barely covers the event.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
