The Truth Behind JFK's Assassination

Newsweek ^ | November 20, 2014 | Max Holland

[DJ Taylor]

On November 29, 1963, President Lyndon Johnson directed the Warren Commission to “evaluate all the facts” in the brutal November 22 murder of his predecessor, John F. Kennedy, on a downtown Dallas street in broad daylight. Reduced to its bare essentials, the investigation sought answers to three fundamental questions: Who, why and how?

“Why” was entirely contingent on “who,” and that depended on “how.” Thus, the linchpin of the Warren Report—and every subsequent investigation—has always been precisely how Kennedy was assassinated in Dealey Plaza. That is the finding from which all the important answers flow; mishandle that question and the credibility of the entire report is undermined. The Warren Commission’s bungling of “how” is a primary reason why there have been so many residual doubts and conspiracy theories over the past 50 years.

[okie01]

The U-2 incident, Bay of Pigs, Vienna, Cuba.

The U-s incident happened during the Eisenhower administration.

[AZLiberty]

The truth about JFK’s assassination is that the government did everything it could to make sure that we didn’t learn the truth about JFK’s assassination.

[Nepeta]

I'm convinced that the shots could have been made from that 6th floor window. But I'm not convinced Oswald did the shooting there or of Tippit.

He was given a paraffin test, which was negative.

Was he involved? I'm sure of that. And what was he doing with David Ferrie's library card?

I've read Judyth Vary Baker's book. I'm not sure quite what to make of her, but she does have physical evidence of working at the same place as Oswald while he worked there--she has her old pay stubs. It's a very odd book, but she can place herself in New Orleans in that time and in those locations.

[mlo]

"Here’s an interview with Oswald’s mistress."

She is not his mistress. She's a crackpot.

[mlo]

Evidence works better.

[mlo]

"LBJ, the one with the most to gain."

And with no evidence of his ability to get Oswald to do it.

[mlo]

"Yes, and President Bush, after 50 years, said it was still not enough, and sealed the evidence for another 50!"

Incorrect. The files were released in the 90s.

[mlo]

"I’m still waiting to hear the truth"

Oswald, three shots from the TSBD.

[mlo]

Bad info. It’s not sealed for another 50.

[mlo]

"From what she says her information has been vetted by experts."

Of course she says that. It's been debunked by experts.

[mlo]

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/judyth.htm

[BeadCounter]

And you don’t have to, but if you watch the film and read the testimony, it’s all there.......

I've heard people say that if he had shot the President head-on coming down Houston Street, it would have been clear where the shot came from but that is speculation. Oswald or the shooter would have been easier to catch. I suppose firing from the back, shooting where he allegedly shot from made it more difficult to figure out where the shots came from.

[MUDDOG]

The Kennedys were afraid they were going to have another U-2-type incident when a couple of unmarked Alabama Air National Guard planes were shot down over Cuba during the Bay of Pigs, but it turned out the Guard pilots had been killed in the crashes.

Before they knew the fate of the pilots though, Bobby told Richard Helms of the CIA, "Those g-d pilots had better be dead." Then afterwards, the administration blocked survivor benefits to the families, until a Texas oilman who had supported JFK in the election told Bobby, "You better pay the families, or I'll blow the lid off this whole thing."

[mlo]

"Answer this question and you will know who did it."

"Who had the most to gain from JFK’s death?"

Doesn't work that way. If it were that simple then every previous President was killed by his VP. Oops.

Crimes are solved with evidence.

[MUDDOG]

more difficult to figure out where the shots came from

In the radio interview, the author said for the first shot the rifle was so angled against the building that it muffled the sound. Bystanders thought it was a firecracker.

[BeadCounter]

True, including the attempted assassination of Reagan. Such logic as I’ve heard before would have meant George H.W. Bush planned the hit which of course, is nonsense.

[Twink]

JFK or any other Kennedy would never be a Republican. Same as MLK wasn’t and wouldn’t be a Conservative Republican.

[mlo]

"1. Why would Oswald use that worthless POS Carcano when he was trained with the Garand."

He didn't own a Garand.

"2. Oswald was arrested 75 minutes after Kennedy’s shooting. In those 75 minutes, he got out of the Book Depository, went home, set out on foot a movie theater, shot Officer Tibbetts, get in an argument in the shoe store and was picked out for the police by the shoe store manager in a dark theater. All in 75 minutes! Right!"

I don't see an objection stated. If that's how long it too, that's how long it took. The record is clear. Except he didn't get in an argument in the shoe store.

[Oztrich Boy]

Shooting at a downward angle causes raises the impact point above the sights mark.

An approaching target with increasing down angle aggravates the problem

A target moving away (and in the case of JFK, moving uphill) with reducuing angle minimises it.

[mlo]

"The Zapruder film and physics prove that Oswald did not kill the President."

No. What you mean is physics applied to your interpretation of what appears on the Zapruder film. It's subjective.

"The fatal shot shows JFK’s head being thrown violently to the left-rear of the limo."

Nope. It shows JFK falling backward, not so violently. However, if you examine the frames right before the impact you'll find that his head was pushed forward instantly before falling back.

And tissue didn't spray the left-rear of the car and you don't see that in the film. Actually you see a jet of tissue being ejected upwards and forwards. The reality is his head exploded and tissue went in all directions.