JFK Assassination - Dealey Plaza

[The Ugly]

LOL @ the band played on.

I'd be using that 6-string a a weapon, knocking down every woman and child I could find until my ass was warm and cozy in that life boat.   Billy Zane approved.

Ballsiest trio in the history of stringed music.

[Nails]

[The Ugly]

So wish we had access.

[The Ugly]

I took my depository pic from just below that top arrow up there, standing on the grass. I swear I coulda hit Oswald with a rock from there.

[ProudVirgin69]

Fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing the photos, I've gotta make it out there myself some time.

Really, the biggest issue I have with most conspiracy theories is that it would be impossible for so many people to remain silent.  Faking the moon landing or faking 9/11 would involve hundreds, if not thousands of people--and to expect that they stay quiet?  Seems less likely than the possibility that we DID land on the moon or that flying 2 commercial airliners into a skyscraper WOULD cause it to collapse.

Now on the flipside, how many people would it take to orchestrate the assassination of a president secretly?  Maybe 5-10?  That seems a lot more likely, although I've never really heard a motive that made sense for killing JFK.  Who knows....it's all fun to think about and discuss, though

[The Ugly]

Fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing the photos, I've gotta make it out there myself some time.

Really, the biggest issue I have with most conspiracy theories is that it would be impossible for so many people to remain silent.  Faking the moon landing or faking 9/11 would involve hundreds, if not thousands of people--and to expect that they stay quiet?  Seems less likely than the possibility that we DID land on the moon or that flying 2 commercial airliners into a skyscraper WOULD cause it to collapse.

Now on the flipside, how many people would it take to orchestrate the assassination of a president secretly?  Maybe 5-10?  That seems a lot more likely, although I've never really heard a motive that made sense for killing JFK.  Who knows....it's all fun to think about and discuss, though

Excellent post, I totally agree. Also, CTs willingly ignore indisputable facts. They focus on a few trees, dismissing the forest.

Agree on JFK, too. That'd be the one they maybe could have pulled off. But the evidence would still have to support it.

Even the small ones, the real shit, like Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, those "conspiracies" were exposed shortly after. Facts didn't support the story, and people talked. And that was the tight-lipped military. How do you keep it secret, then, on such a grand (public) scale? Defies reason.

[Var City]

According to most historians (I wasn't alive at the time), this is when the conspiracy talk began.

Most of the peculiarities and whatnot have been reasonably explained to my satisfaction (No, not just the Warren Commission, c'mon), but I'm not obsessed with it either way.

Still a couple of oddities: Why does Kennedy grab his throat if the bullet entered the back of his neck? Wouldn't the pain be more intense at entry? (Probably explainable, just came to mind.) Also, 'back and to the left,' but, again, forensic experts say it happens.

I really enjoyed Mark Fuhrman's book on it. Investigated it as a detective would; evidence, piece by piece.

Guess I just did what I said I wouldn't. Oops.

That makes sense

Conspiracy theories are usually birthed from silence

Or transparency

Everybody wants a perspective

My point is, the photos you shared are REALLY cool to me (as well as the shot NAILS posted--is that your photo TU? From the window Oswald shot from??? That's interesting as hell).

OK I do have a response though on why Kennedy grabbed his throat

I'll unfortunately answer the question with a question: If a man is shot through his back with a high powered .22 bullet from a relatively short range (or any bullet really excluding a hand gun, because i have actually been grazed by an errant handgun shot and it wasn't bad. It wasn't a puncture wound and it wasn't a a skin graze. It took out a little bit of my flesh/muscle from my hip to the side of my ventro glute because my idiot friend accidentally shot me in the woods when i was 16. I don't need to get into that further. But I DID grab the spot and it DIDN'T make me fall down at all. Would I have done the same if I was shot with a shot gun through the chest? I don't  think so. I think I would have acted sporadically. Perhaps your hands go up when you die... PErhaps kennedy wasn't aware of his actions after suffering a .22 through his back. There is also the idea out there that Kennedy did not grab his throat, that he was in the throes of death so to speak and he raised his arms as many do as an involuntary action when they are on the verge of death).

So my question is, what would Kennedy to after suffering this kind of shot? He can't reach his back. IF he really is going for his throat and not in the involuntary throes of death, is that fuel for conpsiracy theorists OR is the logical answer he is reacting not acting. He is dying. None of us have been there, precisely. Some have been to the edge. I went to the edge once. None of us who have  been there remember it. Which cements my point. Kennedy doesn't know what he's doing there when he goes for his throat.

Also, I believe Oswald's first shot (if he was the sole shooter) was just a misfire that hit the street, not the death wound. The little girl stops and looks up at teh building. He had an itchy trigger finger. He let loose when he was getting a gauge of the vehicle and doinga  proper trail with the .22 to ready his shot. He accidentally hit the trigger.

This means when he DID hit kennedy it was in Panic on the subsequent shot. Which means Oswald had a good shot. And bad nerves.

[Simple Simon]

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.

5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.

6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.

9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it's “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.

10. It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.

A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore.

[Var City]

That's exactly why I'm enjoying this rare discourse on this subject now with TU and others

Thanks for that post tho
SS

Never seen that. Hits the mark 100% however

Especially re: arrogance and pointing out minor
Inconsistencies in "factual" account of event then hypocritically ignoring the glaring logical
Holes in their own far strung theories

[Simple Simon]

That's exactly why I'm enjoying this rare discourse on this subject now with TU and others

Thanks for that post tho
SS

Never seen that. Hits the mark 100% however

Especially re: arrogance and pointing out minor
Inconsistencies in "factual" account of event then hypocritically ignoring the glaring logical
Holes in their own far strung theories

You get them every time by asking them to explain in their own words what they believe happened.
They either instantly fold or at best give a tinpot theory that doesn't hold up under one simple question.
Then they definitely fold.

[_bruce_]

JFK time is filter time - rethink the way you fuel your loved ones.

[The Ugly]

That makes sense

Conspiracy theories are usually birthed from silence

Or transparency

Everybody wants a perspective

My point is, the photos you shared are REALLY cool to me (as well as the shot NAILS posted--is that your photo TU? From the window Oswald shot from??? That's interesting as hell).

OK I do have a response though on why Kennedy grabbed his throat

I'll unfortunately answer the question with a question: If a man is shot through his back with a high powered .22 bullet from a relatively short range (or any bullet really excluding a hand gun, because i have actually been grazed by an errant handgun shot and it wasn't bad. It wasn't a puncture wound and it wasn't a a skin graze. It took out a little bit of my flesh/muscle from my hip to the side of my ventro glute because my idiot friend accidentally shot me in the woods when i was 16. I don't need to get into that further. But I DID grab the spot and it DIDN'T make me fall down at all. Would I have done the same if I was shot with a shot gun through the chest? I don't  think so. I think I would have acted sporadically. Perhaps your hands go up when you die... PErhaps kennedy wasn't aware of his actions after suffering a .22 through his back. There is also the idea out there that Kennedy did not grab his throat, that he was in the throes of death so to speak and he raised his arms as many do as an involuntary action when they are on the verge of death).

So my question is, what would Kennedy to after suffering this kind of shot? He can't reach his back. IF he really is going for his throat and not in the involuntary throes of death, is that fuel for conpsiracy theorists OR is the logical answer he is reacting not acting. He is dying. None of us have been there, precisely. Some have been to the edge. I went to the edge once. None of us who have  been there remember it. Which cements my point. Kennedy doesn't know what he's doing there when he goes for his throat.

Also, I believe Oswald's first shot (if he was the sole shooter) was just a misfire that hit the street, not the death wound. The little girl stops and looks up at teh building. He had an itchy trigger finger. He let loose when he was getting a gauge of the vehicle and doinga  proper trail with the .22 to ready his shot. He accidentally hit the trigger.

This means when he DID hit kennedy it was in Panic on the subsequent shot. Which means Oswald had a good shot. And bad nerves.

I considered this. Perhaps he wasn't reacting to pain as much as suffocation. That's exactly where the hands would go in that case.

[The Ugly]

You get them every time by asking them to explain in their own words what they believe happened.
They either instantly fold or at best give a tinpot theory that doesn't hold up under one simple question.
Then they definitely fold.

"Hey, I'm just asking questions here" is Ventura's go-to.

[Var City]

JFK time is filter time - rethink the way you fuel your loved ones.

I don't get it. You're being esoteric in a conversation where we are all being literal.

(i mean, i don't get what you're implying even).

[orion]

Fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing the photos, I've gotta make it out there myself some time.

Really, the biggest issue I have with most conspiracy theories is that it would be impossible for so many people to remain silent.  Faking the moon landing or faking 9/11 would involve hundreds, if not thousands of people--and to expect that they stay quiet?  Seems less likely than the possibility that we DID land on the moon or that flying 2 commercial airliners into a skyscraper WOULD cause it to collapse.

Now on the flipside, how many people would it take to orchestrate the assassination of a president secretly?  Maybe 5-10?  That seems a lot more likely, although I've never really heard a motive that made sense for killing JFK.  Who knows....it's all fun to think about and discuss, though

Well someone touched on the fact that JFK wanted to abolish the federal reserve.  A lot of people had been killed for a lot less.

As for big conspiracies, you hear that a lot, how could hundreds of people keep a secret?  Well, only the ones at the top would be in the know.  Dozens of people would be relegated certain duties all unaware of what anyone else is doing or what the final mission was.

As for 911, the one question that has bothered me and still never been answered, how could four airliners be hijacked and no fighter jets were dispatched?  I could see it happening with one maybe two but four?  I ain't buying it.  Doesn't the US have a plan in place, even back then, that military jets could intercept any hijacked plane within 15 minutes anywhere on US soil?  Just last week a couple of private planes did not respond to the tower and sure enough jets were there within minutes. 

I believe that the US gov knew this attack was coming.  I believe they let it happen.  Within a few days of Bush taking office he was briefed on the situation in Iraq and regime change was the top priority. But how to sell it to the American public was the biggest obstacle,well problem solved.

Okay I'd better now write anymore, I know they are watching me.

[Shockwave]

I considered this. Perhaps he wasn't reacting to pain as much as suffocation. That's exactly where the hands would go in that case.

imagine a round striking you in the head, you woukdnt have any clue as to what just hit you, and depending on where it hit your head your bodily processes could instantly cease to function while you have a few split seconds of concious thought and panic.

[Simple Simon]

Well someone touched on the fact that JFK wanted to abolish the federal reserve.  A lot of people had been killed for a lot less.

As for big conspiracies, you hear that a lot, how could hundreds of people keep a secret?  Well, only the ones at the top would be in the know.  Dozens of people would be relegated certain duties all unaware of what anyone else is doing or what the final mission was.

As for 911, the one question that has bothered me and still never been answered, how could four airliners be hijacked and no fighter jets were dispatched?  I could see it happening with one maybe two but four?  I ain't buying it.  Doesn't the US have a plan in place, even back then, that military jets could intercept any hijacked plane within 15 minutes anywhere on US soil?  Just last week a couple of private planes did not respond to the tower and sure enough jets were there within minutes.  

I believe that the US gov knew this attack was coming.  I believe they let it happen.  Within a few days of Bush taking office he was briefed on the situation in Iraq and regime change was the top priority. But how to sell it to the American public was the biggest obstacle,well problem solved.

Okay I'd better now write anymore, I know they are watching me.

ludicrous assumption.

as for the jet fighters recently despatched, maybe its down to something called "lessons learned"

[The Ugly]

imagine a round striking you in the head, you woukdnt have any clue as to what just hit you, and depending on where it hit your head your bodily processes could instantly cease to function while you have a few split seconds of concious thought and panic.

I wasn't suggesting he thought to grab his throat, only that he was reflexively reacting to pain. Again, just something I randomly considered at the site. Reasonably explainable, I'm sure.

[The Ugly]

I was SO hoping this wouldn't turn into a 9/11 truther thread.

[Simple Simon]

I wasn't suggesting he thought to grab his throat, only that he was reflexively reacting to pain. Again, just something I randomly considered at the site. Reasonably explainable, I'm sure.

A strike anywhere that resulted in breathing difficulties could result in you reaching for your throat/ mouth area.

[The Ugly]

A strike anywhere that resulted in breathing difficulties could result in you reaching for your throat/ mouth area.

Absolutely.

[Army of One]

Not this shit again.....

Yes, it couldn't have possibly been the guy who that morning took off his wedding ring and left it at home, traveled to work with a collegue who when asked why he had a long thin 3-4 foot paper bag in his hand he said they were curtain rods.Couldnt have been the same man who was sighted by multiple witnesses leaning out of the book depository window with a rifle aimed at the president.Nor was the same mans handprint on said rifle plus 3 spent cartridges anything to do with the presidents death.The fact an overwhelming amount of the witnesses only heard 3 shots is just a coincidence.The same man running from the scene after the presidents death and seen by multiple witnesses murdering a police officer who tried to stop him is purely chance.Also trying to shoot the officer who apprehended him in a movie theatre isn't conclusive evidence.

Go on YouTube or use google, it was easy as shit for an amateur shooter to make those shots and has been done many times since with ease.everyone who visits dealey plaza remarks at hw tiny it is

Err, no.This is the thing about the Kennedy and other conspiracies, people just make shit up.Most of these men got the shots off QUICKER, had never use the type of rifle before or very little  and only had a little time to practice in a range with it, the shooters were average joes and still were getting, 1,2 and 3 hits, give them a few years practice with the rifle and I'm sure they all would be getting 2 hits plus.

This video should sway any doubters. They recreate the head shot from oswalds position, what do you know, it replicates the way kennedys head blew open and the splatter patterns in kennedy's limo.

[The Ugly]

Not this shit again.....

Most here aren't really "this shit"ting again, bud. Just chatting is all.

[Army of One]

Most here aren't really "this shit"ting again, bud. Just chatting is all.

Just gets boring when the conspiracy theories have long been debunked and people keep rehashing them.Only conspiracy that could exist is someone convincing Oswald to do the shooting.I enjoyed your pics though, everyone I've met who has been there is amazed at how small it is, which makes the "knoll shooters" even more comical, as the place is tiny, nevermind the crowd on the overpass who would have seen them all clear as day, or the people only feet in front.

[The Ugly]

Just gets boring when the conspiracy theories have long been debunked and people keep rehashing them.Only conspiracy that could exist is someone convincing Oswald to do the shooting.I enjoyed your pics though, everyone I've met who has been there is amazed at how small it is, which makes the "knoll shooters" even more comical, as the place is tiny, nevermind the crowd on the overpass who would have seen them all clear as day, or the people only feet in front.

Again, not a whole lotta that going on or I'd already be gone. Just wanted to share the pics. Chatting ensued. All good so far. Ease up, fella.