Cold Case: JFK

[revelarts]

Carlos Hathcock passed away in 1999. Pre-current forensics technology. As stated in your own reference, they tried to recreate. Dubious.

Aren't you the one always questioning the government? That would be the premise of your argument in this thread, I do believe. But you don't question Hathcock making such a statement? If he was part of trying to recreate in Quantico, VA a shot taken in Dallas, TX, just who do you suppose was footing his bill? Quantico is home for Marine Corps Sniper School, among others. The other federal gov player in the area is the FBI. Now suddenly their word is gold? I disagree with Hatchcock's statement.

With all do respects to Gunny Hathcock, I would have zero problem having this argument with him and/or taking his ass out to the range. He'd have to prove to me he could out-shoot me, I don't give a rat's ass who he thinks he is. That's a Marine that has nothing to do with you or your argument. It STILL wouldn't support your conspiracy theory with any evidence. Just an opinion.

The ability to shoot and kill does not a detective nor forensics expert make.

When a marine who's been a sniper and worked out of the Marine & FBI (Quantico) headquarters, and recreated the shots,
AND goes against the Gov'ts official story, yes, I think that's significant. And credible and count his testimony as valid expert witness information.

You can dismiss it all out of hand yourself, Ok, you're a better shot than Hathcock, (um, I believe ya Gunny -cough-)
We see it differently.

[revelarts]

As far as forensic evidence goes
maybe you guy can tell me something.
Some forensic experts have noted that frame z313 shows that a shot came from the front.
The blood spatter at the front is a tell tale signature of Entry not exit.





they also point the fact that many eye witnesses at the hospital say the back of head was missing.
while the front was in tack, which also is evidence that they was a shot from the front.
which would mean 2 shooters.

gunny have you ever seen someone shot from the back of the head with rifle from 88 yards whose face was left intact?

[fj1200]

Ok, You and gunny have high standards. no problem.
Just wondering if you & Gunny use the same standard across the board?
Are Hillary or Bill Clinton guilty of any crimes, OJ, Michael Jackson?
I think you both are old enough to remember that Cigarette Corps and Asbestos Corps with the FDA etc claimed that smoking did NOT cause any known problems?
Did you wait for "not-conjecture kind" of "evidence" before you allowed yourself to conclude that they might be guilty?
I get the idea that the JFK "evidence" may not be UP TO your high standards but I just doubt that you used that same High standard across the board.
I just suspect there are things you guys truly believe about events that don't have half the evidence available that the JFK case has for conspiracy.

BTW even congress grudgingly and timidly concluded that JFK's assassination was a "probably" a conspiracy. after NOT allowing certain evidence to be reviewed.
But hey you guy have standards.

House Select Committee: Summary of Findings and Recommendations
"...Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy...."
https://www.archives.gov/research/jf...t/summary.html

Gunny, all due respect to you and your experience, i've heard otherwise concerning the shots Oswald supposedly took.

Kennedy Assassination: Gunny Hathcock's take
Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock is likewise skeptical of Oswald's alleged shooting feat. Hathcock is a former senior instructor at the U. S. Marine Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. He has been described as the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. Craig Roberts asked Hathcock about the marksmanship feat attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission. Hathcock answered that he did not believe Oswald could have done what the Commission said he did. Added Hathcock:
"Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did". (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90)....
https://www.leatherneck.com/forums/s...athcock-s-take

also

I suspect none of the above counts as "evidence" or "not conjecture" to you 2 so I post it as interesting information others might consider to draw different conclusions

Bill and Hillary? Probably but of the campaign finance variety not the killing low level drug dealers in Mena AR variety. OJ? Probably but prosecuted poorly. Michael Jackson? Probably but enough money to make crimes go away. But those aren't really what we're talking about here. You're rehashing the same conjecture that's been quibbled over for decades and the latest crop of declassified data didn't really change anything. There's no new scientific evidence presented. I'd say that there's no chance that acoustical evidence can prove anything in a Canyon. Some people not doing what LHO, allegedly, did doesn't mean that someone else can't or LHO didn't.

If you want to say that someone must have helped him do the planning etc. with little information that supports it then technically you've got a conspiracy and I'm not going to give you much grief. If you want to say that the CIA knew of his existence and was involved in the assassination of a sitting president with nothing more than conjecture and ideas then yeah, you've got a high standard to meet. But just putting up examples of other questionable scenarios proves this outlandish scenario is a trip to far without something more.

[fj1200]

As far as forensic evidence goes
maybe you guy can tell me something.
Some forensic experts have noted that frame z313 shows that a shot came from the front.
The blood spatter at the front is a tell tale signature of Entry not exit.

is observed to be true in the Zapruder Film for the +x (left to right down Elm Street) direction, which is consistent with statement (33) for the observed forward impulse. But if an equivalent statement is attempted for the hypothetical case occurring in the opposite −x direction (i.e., originating from a shot to the front of the limousine), from the Zapruder Film Q is false for reasons explained in Section 2.2. Thus, from the tautological expression

(P⇒Q)⟺(¬Q⇒¬P),

(34)

a frontal impact at Z313 is physically ruled out. Of course, the validity of statement (34) does not rule out conjectured missed shots (although no physical evidence was ever recovered for any such shots), nor does it pinpoint the exact origin of the shot that hit (e.g., the TSBD as opposed to another nearby building). But the modeling study (and underlying dynamics and conservation laws) presented in this paper, in corroboration of the autopsy findings [25], do imply that President Kennedy was not hit by a hypothesized gunshot from the front. The conclusion is an important one given that the hypothesized existence of a shooter in front of the limousine (viz., on the Grassy Knoll) has been the primary physical foundation for virtually all conspiracy conjectures to date on the topic.13 As a parting note, while the simple one-dimensional physical models presented in this paper were derived for application to a special case study (viz., the Kennedy Assassination), the underlying physical principles provide an approximate quantitative description of the interaction between a high-speed projectile (slowed by an intervening atmosphere) and a heterogenous body comprised of bone and visco-elastic tissue (viz., the human head), and may also form a basic conceptual basis for understanding the wounding mechanisms involved in such interactions.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934694/

[Gunny]

When a marine who's been a sniper and worked out of the Marine & FBI (Quantico) headquarters, and recreated the shots,
AND goes against the Gov'ts official story, yes, I think that's significant. And credible and count his testimony as valid expert witness information.

You can dismiss it all out of hand yourself, Ok, you're a better shot than Hathcock, (um, I believe ya Gunny -cough-)
We see it differently.

You find it significant because it suits your fantasy.

I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you over a deceased Gunnery Sergeant's word. Talking shit on a message board goes nowhere. I went to the same school he did. Just not the same war. At my best/in my prime, NO ONE could shoot better than I. Period. It's as much a mental state of being as it is physical fact, and something you definitely would not understand. If you believe you can fail, you will. If I told my Maj W-, my instructor, "I can't anything" I'd not have seen another 10 seconds of his school. That's how it is in the real World.

Once again, you turn your flailing argument into a personal one. This isn't about whether or not I can best a deceased person who is not here to accept the challenge to a shooting match. It's about Oswald taking an easy shot at spitting distance. I'd take that shot with my lever-action carbine with ramp rear and blade front sights. There's nothing more I've got to say on that since you'd rather believe fantasy. Ironically, you'll take some conspiracy BS as gospel without evidence; yet, demand it to refute the fantasy.

The real elephant in the room that your story lacks is a motive. For those who DID have (real or imagined) motive to assassinate JFK, the CIA and/or other Federal government agencies aren't one.

[Gunny]

As far as forensic evidence goes
maybe you guy can tell me something.
Some forensic experts have noted that frame z313 shows that a shot came from the front.
The blood spatter at the front is a tell tale signature of Entry not exit.





they also point the fact that many eye witnesses at the hospital say the back of head was missing.
while the front was in tack, which also is evidence that they was a shot from the front.
which would mean 2 shooters.

gunny have you ever seen someone shot from the back of the head with rifle from 88 yards whose face was left intact?

I'm not the one trying to tell people what conclusions to draw. You are. I'm stating MY opinions based on science, fact and real evidence. You're throwing out he said/she said.

In all honesty, it doesn't really matter anymore who killed JFK or why. He's STILL dead 60 years later and the case has been long ago put to rest by everyone except necromongering conspiracy theorists. EVEN IF a boatload of real, hard, scientific/forensic evidence was data dumped on the public right this minute, naming names and everything, who is it you think is still alive to be held accountable?

You couldn't possible give me a worse opinion of the Federal government and its shenanigans than I already have. I just like to stick to the shit they're actually doing that no one is doing anything about.

[Gunny]

Bill and Hillary? Probably but of the campaign finance variety not the killing low level drug dealers in Mena AR variety. OJ? Probably but prosecuted poorly. Michael Jackson? Probably but enough money to make crimes go away. But those aren't really what we're talking about here. You're rehashing the same conjecture that's been quibbled over for decades and the latest crop of declassified data didn't really change anything. There's no new scientific evidence presented. I'd say that there's no chance that acoustical evidence can prove anything in a Canyon. Some people not doing what LHO, allegedly, did doesn't mean that someone else can't or LHO didn't.

If you want to say that someone must have helped him do the planning etc. with little information that supports it then technically you've got a conspiracy and I'm not going to give you much grief. If you want to say that the CIA knew of his existence and was involved in the assassination of a sitting president with nothing more than conjecture and ideas then yeah, you've got a high standard to meet. But just putting up examples of other questionable scenarios proves this outlandish scenario is a trip to far without something more.

If I was going to take a stab in the dark, my two favorites are: Cuban Freedom Fighters abandoned at the Bay of Pigs, or Marcello and Trafficante. They actually had a motive given AG Robert Kennedy was up their every orifice.

Then it goes back to nobody with that much power and access to killers is going to get a bumbling fool like Oswald to do anything more than clean the shitter for them.

Oswald's amateurism is another thing that points to his acting on his own.

[revelarts]

..There's nothing more I've got to say on that ...

no worries.
But as usual I've got a lot to say myself, but I'll leave it here.

[revelarts]

1 last post concerning the veracity of the Hathcock quote

Carlos Hathcock passed away in 1999. Pre-current forensics technology. As stated in your own reference, they tried to recreate. Dubious.

Aren't you the one always questioning the government? That would be the premise of your argument in this thread, I do believe. But you don't question Hathcock making such a statement? If he was part of trying to recreate in Quantico, VA a shot taken in Dallas, TX, just who do you suppose was footing his bill? Quantico is home for Marine Corps Sniper School, among others. The other federal gov player in the area is the FBI. Now suddenly their word is gold? I disagree with Hatchcock's statement.

....

letter to James DiEugenio
Posted August 28, 2020

Jim,

I’ve been asked this question of whether Carlos said this or not many times. I can assure you he did. He was a personal friend of mine, and when I was doing the research on Kill Zone I called him and asked what he thought about the “official” story of Oswald being the lone nut with a Carcano could do what the Warren Commission said. He laughed and said that they tried to duplicate it at Quantico at the USMC Sniper Instructor School. He said they used a 6.5 Carcano with 4x scope (he didn’t mention if it was a cheap Hollywood Optics scope like what was mounted on the “Oswald” rifle.) But I’m sure they bore sighted it before trying to duplicate the feat of 3 shots in 5.6 seconds on a moving target in a high to low angle. He said after several tries they simply could not duplicate it on the conditions Oswald would have had. It takes time to fire a shot, work the bolt, get back on target and get the proper eye relief from the scope to fire the next shot.

I didn’t record the phone call but I took notes. When I wrote that part of Kill Zone I sent it to him to make sure it was correct. He said it was.

A few years back a Japanese film company came over here and did a feature piece on the JFK assassination. One thing they did was come to me to try and duplicate it here. I was referred to by Jim Marrs. They had managed to obtain a Carcano from a Hollywood arsenal that had film props and weapons, and it was better than the Oswald weapon as it was a 7.35mm from Mussolini’s elite guard troops which had a much smoother action. It still jammed when I tried to rapid fire it.

We set up on a balcony of a friend’s house out here in the country overlooking a valley. We set up a man-size target at 88 yards which was the longest shot according to the WC. We set up a window frame on the railing of the balcony/deck and I took up a position similar to what the 6th Floor Museum has set up. I shot a total of 18 rounds in total, firing 3 rounds on the clock timer at a time. On most strings I managed the first two shots in the target but not all three before the clock ran out. Then I took my Remington 700 Police Sniper rifle, .308 caliber, and shot four strings with three hitting the target inside the time limit. The action was much smoother, the rifle much more accurate, and a good scope.

Craig Roberts
Edited August 29, 2020 by James DiEugenio

Book Kill Zone
In 1987, former U.S. Marine Corps sniper Craig Roberts, a seasoned veteran of the Vietnam war, stood for the first time at the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository. As he looked down into that the U.S. Government maintains was the kill zone used by Lee Harvey Oswald, he knew immediately the the Warren Commission's verdict that Oswald, acting alone from that position, fired three shots is 5.6 seconds with an ancient bolt-action rifle was a lie. If Oswald, by himself, could not have done it, then who could? And why? Follow Roberts's investigation of six years into a shadow world of black operations into a level above the CIA, the KGB, the Mafia, Texas oil and others into a powerful organization that to them, to murder a head of a country anywhere is "business as usual."

[fj1200]

^Improbable? Probably. Impossible? Probably not.

What are the alternative theories? A shooter from the front? Forensically doesn't pan out. Another shooter from the back? I don't recall hearing that theory but subject to some of the same limitations.

[Gunny]

no worries.
But as usual I've got a lot to say myself, but I'll leave it here.

I do not discount your opinions. You are the one with the black or white only mentality here. As observation, not insult.

I'm not trying to win anything here. The evidence to support that statement is there is nothing to win. I would rather know why a certain percentage of people can take any topic, reject what is there in plain sight in lieu of some overly-complicated fantasy that requires more improbabilities to come together perfectly, than me learning to read, write and speak Chinese by lunchtime.

So, is there a conspiracy behind what the MSM/left labels "mass shootings" in recent years? Lone nutjobs? Or is something more nefarious behind each and every one? Just wondering.

[revelarts]

I do not discount your opinions. You are the one with the black or white only mentality here. As observation, not insult.

Well if i see the evidence leans more one way than the other I tend to (or hope I tend to) take that as factual.

you know like you would at a trial.
seriously Gunny, no disrespect to you at all, but if Hathcock were on the stand and you followed him on the stand I think most juries would take Hathcocks words over your's. especially since you haven't recreated it and tried to do it.
Not a pissing contest, or "opinion" just that his view would likely hold more weight than your's.
Even though you are sincerely convinced that you or Oswald could do it.
Also Oswald said he did NOT do it. Unlike most lone nuts who do take "credit" for those kinds of acts.
BTW, if i remember correctly they checked Oswald's face and hands for powder and found none.

Also simply explanations don't necessarily equal true.

....

So, is there a conspiracy behind what the MSM/left labels "mass shootings" in recent years? Lone nutjobs? Or is something more nefarious behind each and every one? Just wondering.

I don't know. Not that I'm aware of.
Do you have some intel you'd like to share with us?
If the evidence is there, I'm willing to look at it aren't you?

[Gunny]

Well if i see the evidence leans more one way than the other I tend to (or hope I tend to) take that as factual.

you know like you would at a trial.
seriously Gunny, no disrespect to you at all, but if Hathcock were on the stand and you followed him on the stand I think most juries would take Hathcocks words over your's. especially since you haven't recreated it and tried to do it.
Not a pissing contest, or "opinion" just that his view would likely hold more weight than your's.
Even though you are sincerely convinced that you or Oswald could do it.
Also Oswald said he did NOT do it. Unlike most lone nuts who do take "credit" for those kinds of acts.
BTW, if i remember correctly they checked Oswald's face and hands for powder and found none.

Also simply explanations don't necessarily equal true.

I don't know. Not that I'm aware of.
Do you have some intel you'd like to share with us?
If the evidence is there, I'm willing to look at it aren't you?

I'm not seeing where I disagree with Hathcock. I disagree with you not doing your homework and jumping to conclusions on half a tank. And you ARE trying to start a pissing contest between me and a deceased, decorated Marine who is not around to defend himself or his argument.

Edit: Never mind. Pointless.

[revelarts]

NO Magic Bullet.
the bullet hit Kennedy in the back and then fell into the back seat.
The Secret Service man there NOW SAYS he pulled it out of the seat as everyone else rushed into the hospital.
He put the bullet in his pocket walked it into the hospital and put it on the gunnery... where it was "found".

(NewsNation) — A former Secret Service agent who witnessed President John F. Kennedy‘s assassination 60 years ago is casting renewed doubt on the so-called “magic bullet” theory.
Paul Landis, 88, was in the car directly behind Kennedy when shots rang out in Dallas’ Dealey Plaza in 1963. The former agent claims that after the president was shot, he found one of the bullets lodged in the back seat of Kennedy’s limo. He says he later placed it on JFK’s stretcher at the hospital.
“I put the bullet in my pocket,” said Landis. “We raced through the lobby of the emergency room. I got pushed right up against the examination table where they had placed President Kennedy. When I was going into the room, they were removing his body from the gurney. And I quickly thought, ‘This is the place where the bullet should be.’ I made a snap decision.”
.....

According to that theory, one of the bullets hit Kennedy from behind and continued to hit then-Texas Gov. John Connally, who was sitting in front of the president.
“I heard the sound of a high-powered rifle. And just a few seconds after the first (shot), I heard a second shot, and I was looking at the President’s car,” he said. “I saw no movement or disturbance. And I thought that shot had missed. I heard the third shot come very quickly after the second shot I heard.”
Landis believes the bullet only hit Kennedy and subsequently popped out in the back seat.
He said he never questioned the magic bullet theory for “several years” because he initially didn’t know what it was.
Landis now questions whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in Kennedy’s killing, which has long been the official stance of the U.S. intelligence community.
“For one single bullet to hit the president in the head and hip. Then Gov. Connolly in the shoulder (and) continues down to hit his wrist and then ends up lodged in his leg. It just didn’t make any sense at all,” Landis said.
He said he was traumatized for months after the shooting.
“I kind of figured that I would be interviewed by the Warren Commission once I heard that it was formed,” he said. “I was a little nervous about being examined because I was afraid I was going to break down. There was a lot of crying with everybody. Nobody talked to each other about this.”
According to Landis, the Warren Commission never interviewed him.

Not enough bullets for Oswald only.

Gov't was lying? say it aint so.
No one should question the gov't.

[fj1200]

A secret service agent was there, found a bullet (was that the pristine one?), put it in his pocket, on a whim tossed it on the gurney, thinks a bullet "popped out," and didn't question the MBT because he didn't know what the Magic Bullet Theory was? Interesting.

Did you watch the forensics episode in the OP?