read the warran report. people saw oswald with the gun. it was oswalds gun. etc etc.
I'll admit, I almost thought you had me.
I went to verify some things.
I found this article which seemed to convince me that Oswald did have significant evidence against him.
I hear that new book by Bugliosi (which is the primary source for that new documentary by Tom Hanks) is pretty damning as well. I will have to read both that and the Warren report.
The eyewitness you reference, Howard L. Brennan, that the Warren comission cites as the man who saw Oswald in the window ... that man claimed Oswald was standing. By the Warren comission's own admission (hey that rhymes!) he must be CONFUSED, as physics would dictate the shooter must have been crouched.
Keep in mind this witness is across the street and six stories down.
He couldn't even tell if the man was sitting or standing ... but he could identify oswald?
That article goes point by point over the Warren Commission reports findings, and i have to say ... i am no longer impressed in the slightest. It just reconfirms all of my suspicions.
The only thing i will give you is that it WAS Oswald's gun.
But every single news report from the day of the shooting, along with the POLICE RECORD and testimony of the police officer who was in the room and who was later shot dead in the stomach (why? conspiracy?), indicate that the gun found was a 7.65 MAUZER ... but suddenly the next day it became, not a 7.65 MAUZER but Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle?
Hmm.
It gets more fishy the more i read.
Even the 'evidence' doesn't seem to jive.
:(
Read that article for me, please.
Tell me what you think.
You COULD be right.
But you COULD be wrong.
So could I.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Here is the statement or debriefing timeline agent Emory Roberts filed of the days horrific events. He doesn't make any mention of the "stand down" order he is observed to have issued [see first link].
Here are interview quotes from various members of Kennedy's Secret Service detail explicitly stating that he was an easy president to watch after and that he did not issue orders to service members particularly he did not order agents off the back of his limo.
EXPLANATION OF VIDEO UP TOP PLEASE?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Here is the thing.
Magical shot or no "magical" shot,
it proves NOTHING against Oswald.
Who the hell was L. H. Oswald anyhow?
Think about it.
Really think about it.
He was nobody before the shooting.
No one ever heard him talk about the president or wanting to kill him.
He vehmenently denied involvement in the shooting,
and there is NO PROOF he did it. NONE.
He is just a poor dupe who happened to work in the building that the perpatrators may have shot the president from. The government knew his name, because he had been a low level intelligence operative on the FBI payroll up to the day of the shooting. That alone should be cause for concern. This was NOT common knowledge, and still is not. It was completely buried at the time, no one wanted you to know that ... oh by the way, this "crazy" "lone" nut Oswald that we say shot JFK .... oh yeah ... he was actually known to the government ... we were his employer ... he was with intelligence services ... infact, there is the counter-theory that Oswald was not only setup to be the patsy well in advance by bathing him as a communist -- his "defection" to russia, was actually an intelligence operation under the employ of the US Government. Why would a private in the army be immersed in Russian language courses through the Army? Maybe he was invovled in intelligence operations? You think?
Listen to the link. it is an interview with LHO BEFORE the assassination! VERY REVEALING! Get the feeling that Oswald was pretty damn intelligent? That he was probably pretty far left against the status quot of Cuban-American relations? That the government proabably wasn't too fond of his view point, to say the least. That having known and employed Mr. Oswald, that they may reconsider and decide to go ahead and "expend" him in a plot that involved getting rid of another man, cough JFK cough, that was not far enough to the right in his views against Cuba?
Another theory is that he was not only made the patsy, but also duped in to involvement on the level of having him think he was actually there to infiltrate and STOP the assassination plot. oh ... and there is some proof that he knew Jack Ruby ... Jack Ruby whom the government claims shot Oswald because he loved Kennedy, but whose lover says that is not so, and whom was KNOWN to be in the employement of one Richard Nixon back in the 40s and who had mafia connections to boot ...
Either way, the case against Oswald is completely devoid of proof. The man worked in that building and witnesses place him on the SECOND floor both before AND after the shooting. NOT the 6th floor.
The whole thing stinks to high hell on the very face of it, and there ain't NO PROOF that Oswald did it. Just government "say so". Tell me that would stand in a court of law. It is clear THAT is why he was murdered ... the government absolutely could NOT have a trial! They HAD NO PROOF because HE DID NOT DO IT!
Whoa dude. I am just pointing out that there is more to it(car seat height, seat positions, sitting positon, wrinkled shirts.......)
Comments
I'll admit, I almost thought you had me.
I went to verify some things.
I found this article which seemed to convince me that Oswald did have significant evidence against him.
I hear that new book by Bugliosi (which is the primary source for that new documentary by Tom Hanks) is pretty damning as well. I will have to read both that and the Warren report.
Although, then I read this: The Warren Comission's Case Against Oswald ... and now I am right back to square one.
The eyewitness you reference, Howard L. Brennan, that the Warren comission cites as the man who saw Oswald in the window ... that man claimed Oswald was standing. By the Warren comission's own admission (hey that rhymes!) he must be CONFUSED, as physics would dictate the shooter must have been crouched.
Keep in mind this witness is across the street and six stories down.
He couldn't even tell if the man was sitting or standing ... but he could identify oswald?
That article goes point by point over the Warren Commission reports findings, and i have to say ... i am no longer impressed in the slightest. It just reconfirms all of my suspicions.
The only thing i will give you is that it WAS Oswald's gun.
But every single news report from the day of the shooting, along with the POLICE RECORD and testimony of the police officer who was in the room and who was later shot dead in the stomach (why? conspiracy?), indicate that the gun found was a 7.65 MAUZER ... but suddenly the next day it became, not a 7.65 MAUZER but Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle?
Hmm.
It gets more fishy the more i read.
Even the 'evidence' doesn't seem to jive.
:(
Read that article for me, please.
Tell me what you think.
You COULD be right.
But you COULD be wrong.
So could I.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
One more time, lets look at this:
Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts Orders Agent Henry Ripka to Abandon His Post As Personal Body Cover To JFK
Here is the statement or debriefing timeline agent Emory Roberts filed of the days horrific events. He doesn't make any mention of the "stand down" order he is observed to have issued [see first link].
Here are interview quotes from various members of Kennedy's Secret Service detail explicitly stating that he was an easy president to watch after and that he did not issue orders to service members particularly he did not order agents off the back of his limo.
EXPLANATION OF VIDEO UP TOP PLEASE?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Whoa dude. I am just pointing out that there is more to it(car seat height, seat positions, sitting positon, wrinkled shirts.......)