How Did the Mob Kill JFK?

[brianp]

I don't know if this will have anything original or will just be a rehash of the same tired old nonsense, but it might be worth watching for a laugh if nothing else.

How Did the Mob Kill JFK? Discovery Channel (UK) 21:00 today 17 Nov

[brianp]

I don't know if this will have anything original or will just be a rehash of the same tired old nonsense, but it might be worth watching for a laugh if nothing else.

How Did the Mob Kill JFK? Discovery Channel (UK) 21:00 today 17 Nov

A waste of time - nothing new. An alleged prison confession, a few tenuous mob connections we've known about for years and a sprinkling of maybes and could haves thrown in for good measure.

[skbuncks]

Glad I missed it.

skb

[alganbagerap]

The Cold Six Thousand by James Ellroyis a good mixture of known facts and "interpreted data." Fiction, of course, but very entertaining.

[Tony Williams]

I happened to be in Dallas in May for a conference, and the hotel was close to Dealey Plaza. It felt quite curious to walk the route and see where he was shot from, and where the car was at the time. I haven't studied this and there may well be a simple explanation, but it seems odd that the presidential limo diverted from the direct route to make a short dog-leg which happened to take it right past the Book Depository.

[Croydon Bob]

I used to be quite interested in JFK conspiracy thories but I'm long bored with it now.

There is lots of contradictory evidence. there's lots of good reason to accept that various bits of the US Govt lied, fabricated and/or destroyed evidence after JFK's death.

But none of that proves a big conspiracy, just lots of little ones. Just because a particular unit of FBI or CIA agents started faking evidence after his death, it doesn't prove that they were behind the assasination, or even knew who was. Just that they wanted to take advantage of it to blame the mob/Russians/a lone gunman for their own purposes. Lots of people lied because they wanted to cover something up, or blame someone, or just to get in the spotlight; perhaps none of them really new anything pertinent.

And so much destroying, lying and faking went on by people who had no idea what had really happened that they've muddied the water beyond the point where anyone will ever be able to work out if there was a real conspiracy.

As for death bed confessions; a fair few people have made them and they mainly contradict. So without some good corroborating evidence they are worthless.

All the circumstantial evidence seems to add up to something, but would it have been any different if you pick a random date and assume the then-current Prez was bumped off? You could probably find all sorts of coincidences around the date and place.

People say Oswald was lucky to hit Kennedy at the distance with that weapon, etc. But is it any more statistically odd than John W Hinckey's failure to kill Reagan? At that range, with that weapon he should have killed the President.

[Tony Williams]

People say Oswald was lucky to hit Kennedy at the distance with that weapon, etc. But is it any more statistically odd than John W Hinckey's failure to kill Reagan? At that range, with that weapon he should have killed the President.

The scope-sighted 6.5mm rifle Oswald used was more than adequate for the short range involved.

OTOH, the .22LR revolver used by Hinckley was low-powered and it is notoriously difficult to hit anything with a pistol in the stress of action if the target is much further than touching distance, especially if firing as fast as Hinckley was (six shots in three seconds = no time to aim). The average distance at which US police officers score hits when firing their handguns in action is about seven feet - beyond that they are liable to miss.

[polomint38]

All explained by Red Dwarf, JFK was the gunman on the grassy knoll who travelled back in time to shot himself to stop his own impeachment. O0

W6naJ08Tskk

[Croydon Bob]

The scope-sighted 6.5mm rifle Oswald used was more than adequate for the short range involved.

OTOH, the .22LR revolver used by Hinckley was low-powered and it is notoriously difficult to hit anything with a pistol in the stress of action if the target is much further than touching distance, especially if firing as fast as Hinckley was (six shots in three seconds = no time to aim). The average distance at which US police officers score hits when firing their handguns in action is about seven feet - beyond that they are liable to miss.

So, on balance, my "is it any more statistically odd" statement holds out. Even if because I was wrong on both counts?

Although, to be fair to me, I did say "people say". The JFK assassination conspiracies are full of reasonable sounding claims that other people can debunk but which are repeated endlessly all the same.

I'm sure you are right about Hinckley's gun but I can't remember reading that before, only conspiracy theories suggesting that he deliberately missed or whatever. And all the "thank God it is a miracle" bollocks.

[Croydon Bob]

All explained by Red Dwarf, JFK was the gunman on the grassy knoll who travelled back in time to shot himself to stop his own impeachment.

As I'm sure we've said before: more plausible than many of the most popular theories.

[panama]

And so much destroying, lying and faking went on by people who had no idea what had really happened that they've muddied the water beyond the point where anyone will ever be able to work out if there was a real conspiracy.

That may be the truth.