Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
62. Did the book mention the large bullet fragments that were found in JFK's car
Sun Dec 1, 2013, 01:52 PM
Dec 2013

and were matched to JFK's rifle? Probably not. I wonder why? Could it be that the book was trying to ignore evidence that the head shot came from Oswald's rifle? That's a little harder to explain than the shell casings, don't you think? One bullet missed, the other was the "magic" bullet, and the third hit JFK in the head, and then broke into two large fragments and bunch of small ones. The bullet that missed was not found. The other two were traced to Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all others. That leaves zero shots left for the accidental AR-15.

Did the book mention the three TSBD employees that were standing in the window one floor down from Oswald, and who testified that they heard three shots from above them? One of them, a gun guy, even heard the sound of reloading and of shell casings hitting the ground. Wonder why they omitted that evidence?

Did the book mention the fact that the HSCA had a panel of photographic experts examine the Zapruder film, and found that the angle of JFK's head was such that the bullet trajectory was lined up with Oswald? Probably not. The guy who came up with the accidental AR-15 story was a gun expert, but had no expertise in analyzing photographs.

Also, despite the fact that many people have reproduced Oswald's shot, doing it even faster and with more accuracy than he did, you still question whether he could have done it. But you are ready to believe that an AR-15 went off by accident, and of all places it could have gone, it hit JFK directly in the head. Did they do any experiments to see how unlikely it would be to swing an AR-15 around at random and then score a direct hit?

About the fact that the WC only called witnesses that supported their original theory, yes, you are making that up.

Well, that's certainly one I'd never heard before today. Schema Thing Nov 2013 #1
Me neither, it's very well done, chilling to watch, lots of evidence presented. I'm not RKP5637 Nov 2013 #4
Occam's Razor rules this idiocy out in quick order. stopbush Dec 2013 #42
I dissagree rickford66 Dec 2013 #48
You're wrong on the facts, or you're making shit up. stopbush Dec 2013 #52
Have you read the book? rickford66 Dec 2013 #61
Did the book mention the large bullet fragments that were found in JFK's car DanTex Dec 2013 #62
If you read the book ... rickford66 Dec 2013 #67
Wow, the book actually claims that the bullet hit the pavement, broke in half DanTex Dec 2013 #68
Wrong again. stopbush Dec 2013 #63
call it the marvin theory arely staircase Dec 2013 #64
I counter this with this seasons Nova. A real science show. FFS, will this shit ever end? n-t Logical Nov 2013 #2
I doubt it, it will go on and on ... much like 9/11. n/t RKP5637 Nov 2013 #6
I agree. I understand people loving the thrill of a CT but it gets old. n-t Logical Nov 2013 #7
What people love are facts. When they feel they have been lied to about the facts, they have sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #9
I agree so much, I just don't think the real story has/will ever come out ... there RKP5637 Nov 2013 #11
The Deniers will, sooner or later, simply have to accept the fact that people just don't believe sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #12
Those who know the truth are masters of deception. We have so much misinformation and RKP5637 Dec 2013 #15
You dont realize how any story can go either way they want it to go...... Logical Nov 2013 #13
It's stunning how some people can believe the most ridiculous things. zappaman Dec 2013 #14
I 100% agree. Even videos that support my side I do not 100% trust..... Logical Dec 2013 #16
That just goes to prove you are part of whistler162 Dec 2013 #25
Damn zappaman Dec 2013 #28
... hmmm ... looks fishy to me! lol, n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #32
I don't think such beliefs hurt Niceguy1 Dec 2013 #37
I'll see if I can find that airing archived on the net, NOVA, it would be interesting to watch. n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #17
It aired this month. Try this link...... Logical Dec 2013 #18
Thanks!!! n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #19
Well, if everyone lies all the time, why would you think that only the WC was telling the truth? sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #22
Watch the Nova show. Get back to me. n-t Logical Dec 2013 #41
People generally aren't aware of the facts. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #20
People have explained where the WC was flawed. But some people would rather ignore those sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #23
Not really, they haven't. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #24
"The WC was flawed." Funny how they never mention any specifics. DanTex Dec 2013 #33
Even funnier when someone claims to have read all 26 volumes of the WCR zappaman Dec 2013 #36
+1 Historic NY Dec 2013 #60
Speaking of being lied to about the facts... DanTex Dec 2013 #21
The part that bothers me in all of this is surely someone would have noticed an RKP5637 Dec 2013 #39
Well some people claim there is a "puff of smoke" in a picture zappaman Dec 2013 #40
That's hilarious coming from a person who suggested we not be distracted by the forensic science. The Midway Rebel Dec 2013 #26
So, was the SS Agent in on the "conspiracy" to kill JFK? stopbush Dec 2013 #43
really? backwoodsbob Dec 2013 #45
That BS is a limited hangout. For decades they have been peddling the Lee Harvey Oswald GoneFishin Nov 2013 #3
Yeah, you touched on the part that I don't see either, "... And then everyone in authority RKP5637 Nov 2013 #5
Of course. An AR-15 went off by accident and nobody noticed. One of the more absurd CTs. DanTex Nov 2013 #8
Yeah, the part I have difficulty with in all of this is it would have been so blatantly RKP5637 Nov 2013 #10
Yup, hard to imagine. rickford66 Dec 2013 #46
That show should just be called "Error" nt The Midway Rebel Dec 2013 #27
lol, n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #29
This is bullshit. zappaman Dec 2013 #30
Yep, there's a flavor/version for everyone! n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #34
Of all the CTs, that's the craziest treestar Dec 2013 #31
Where's Alex Jones when we need him. lol n/t RKP5637 Dec 2013 #35
That's actually a good question... zappaman Dec 2013 #38
George Hickey sued St. Martin's Press over that idiotic book. duffyduff Dec 2013 #44
Is it idiocy to think... cherokeeprogressive Dec 2013 #47
"Eleventy-thousand posts about the inaccuracy"... Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #49
My example was actually meant to be "worst case". It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that cherokeeprogressive Dec 2013 #50
I guess the head snap to the rear was meaningless after all. nt nyquil_man Dec 2013 #51
If you try to catch up on the 22 years of scientific investigation since Stone's JFK, greyl Dec 2013 #53
The "back and to the left" thing has ALWAYS seemed to me to be a muscular/nerve reaction. cherokeeprogressive Dec 2013 #55
I'm aware that his head moves forward. nyquil_man Dec 2013 #56
Ah, I take it all back! Very sorry 'bout misunderstanding you. nt greyl Dec 2013 #58
Quite all right. nyquil_man Dec 2013 #59
The book was a fabrication and the subject of a lawsuit. See my post upthread. duffyduff Dec 2013 #65
I know that too. nyquil_man Dec 2013 #66
Yep Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #54
That'll teach me to add a sarcasm tag. nyquil_man Dec 2013 #57
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Mortal Error: The Shot Th...»Reply #62