JFK Assassination - more than one shooter? (Page 7/7)
Cliff Pennock SEP 29, 07:33 AM
I'm not quick to label something as a "conspiracy," and, in this case, I tend to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) acted alone as the gunman. The evidence suggesting otherwise seems rather weak.

That being said, there are a few things that just don't feel right if he was the sole gunman.

Firstly, LHO could have technically made those shots. The rifle he used could be fired within the 5.6-second timeframe (though some sources suggest it might even have been longer, over 8 seconds). The shot itself wasn't particularly challenging; the rifle had low recoil, and the bullet had minimal drop over that distance. However, we must consider Oswald's state of mind. He might have been a skilled marksman but had never killed before, let alone attempt to kill such an important individual. Unless he had nerves of steel, he must have been incredibly anxious, sweaty, and perhaps even trembling. This would significantly reduce the likelihood of hitting two near-perfect shots. Yet he did it.

What's intriguing is that three expert marksmen, all rated as "Master" by the National Rifle Association, attempted the same shots with a more relaxed time limit and under less stressful conditions. In their first shots, all hit the target (LHO supposedly missed his first shot). The second shots were all missed in the initial four attempts. LHO's second shot was nearly perfect, hitting Kennedy in the back and injuring Connally. The third shots were hit in all attempts except one. LHO's third shot was impeccable, hitting the president in the head. So, even seasoned riflemen found it impressive what LHO accomplished under such tense circumstances.

It's puzzling that LHO was so adamant in his claim he was just a patsy. If he was the sole gunman, given his background and supposed motives, one would expect him to brag about his actions or at least explain why he did it. But he never did.

Oswald quickly became a suspect, which is remarkable. Eyewitness accounts of the shooter were mostly unclear, and there wasn't much to implicate LHO at the time except his "strange behavior." It's odd that, amidst the general chaos and excitement surrounding the event, people managed to single out one person as acting even more strangely. They did find his palm print on the rifle, but that wasn't identified until after his apprehension.

Then there's the case of Jack Ruby, whose reasons for his actions are bizar to say the least. He had no personal connection to the Kennedys, yet he claimed to act out of a desire to spare Jackie Kennedy from a lengthy trial and protect the Jewish community's image. However, there was no connection between the Jewish community, LHO, or the Kennedys. It seems these connections existed solely in Ruby's head. While there are anecdotal reports of Ruby being paranoid in the year prior to the assassination, no concrete sources or medical records confirm such severe mental instability. It is documented, though, that he became increasingly mentally unstable during his time in jail. But that was after the shooting.

In conclusion, my inclination is still toward Lee Harvey Oswald being the sole gunman because there's a lack of compelling evidence pointing in any other direction, in my view. However, it does mean that LHO was remarkably lucky to pull off those shots, and the investigative work conducted in just a few hours is impressive. Also, despite having a political motive to kill JFK, LHO never made that motive clear, which is usually a key aspect in such crimes.
maryjane SEP 29, 09:22 AM

quote
In conclusion, my inclination is still toward Lee Harvey Oswald being the sole gunman because there's a lack of compelling evidence pointing in any other direction, in my view. However, it does mean that LHO was remarkably lucky to pull off those shots, and the investigative work conducted in just a few hours is impressive. Also, despite having a political motive to kill JFK, LHO never made that motive clear, which is usually a key aspect in such crimes.



I agree.
Much was made (understandably) of LHO's visit to USSR and him being a commie or socialist, but there is a very lengthy description of him and his activities in the years leading up to the assignation. It's in US National archives as part of the Warren Commission report. He became quite disillusioned with life under Stalin and socialism and returned to the US with his new wife. It's a pretty long read.
https://www.archives.gov/re...ort/appendix-13.html

Shooting at a target moving away from you is easy peasy. You wait for the target to get to your aim point, you don't try to acquire the target in your sights the first shot.
I qualified in the Marines on the same range LHO did. It's been a minute or 2 but I believe, the shortest we fired was 100 yards, then incrementally longer ranges and ended at 500 yards, each at different positions(laying prone, sitting, standing etc) A 1/2 blind person can hit bullseye at 100 yards with a good rifle.

As far as him (or any other Marine) being nervous and apprehensive as he waited for his shot that morning, I disagree. I was a door gunner in Vietnam. It's incredibly easy to kill a man from a distance. Way TOO easy.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 09-29-2023).]

82-T/A [At Work] SEP 29, 11:33 AM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

I think it was the late 70s or early 80s when GM got into a stink when some Oldsmobile owners found out their engines were Chevy and not Olds.
I had a Pontiac Ventura that had a factory installed Buick 350 in it. Front mounted dist and an external oil pump. That same engine was used in some Jeep Gladiator and Wagoneers under the name Dauntless V8.



I know I keep taking this totally off-topic here, but I am really fascinated by these older engines. A lot has changed in ~50 years, but when I look at older cars... actually, let me take a step back. Quick side-tangent. When I was in my early, early 20s in the 1990s. Like 20/21... I used to hit this junkyard (I feel like I've already mentioned this). Because of the ebb-and-flow of Florida's boom-years (every 7-8 years, massive growth), entire swaths of South Florida would be completely up-ended. What would happen is that entire neighborhoods would flip from the old generation, to a new generation. People would sell their homes and move north to Ocala, pan-handle, etc., and as a result they'd usually sell everything. This resulted in a LOT... I mean a LOT of non-running (but otherwise pristine) classic cars ending up in the junkyard ... like I think I explained before. I would see Nash Metropolitans, every flavor of 70s car from the big-4, and lots and lots of classic 60s cars, including muscle cars that would sell for $100k+ in the condition that they were in even in the junkyard back in ~1999.

Never the less, I always looked in the engine compartments, and I was always fascinated by not just the relative simplicity (or I should say "lack of clutter"), but the design that went into these engines. It really felt like the engine aesthetics played a large part in the car. Even something as simple as a big floaty beige land yacht ... would have a very ornately designed big block motor in one of several attention-grabbing colors, with big dramatic words on the air cleaner. There were many bright orange, bright blue, green, even gold-colored engines. I even once saw a bright purple or lavender colored engine in some Dodge 2-door car ... like a Challenger or something.

It just kind of kills me that we've sort of lost that art and attention to detail on something like these engines. It's completely lost on most people today.

Even like this engine in my Crown Victoria (sorry, bad picture). At the time in 2001/2002, this engine was somewhat of a technical marvel for something being in what was essentially considered a very boring / utilitarian car. Multi-cam engine with multiple valves on top of an advanced medium-sized V8 engine that's made of advanced alloys with multiple composites.



All they did is simply stick a black plastic cover over it. This one actually came from the 2004 Grand Marquis, which I found in a junkyard, otherwise mine looked the same, but the V8 logo was just black like the rest of the cover.


Just bums me out.


I wish there was a museum (maybe there is), where they have all these engines carefully re-constructed and detailed as they would be, and on display by year.
maryjane SEP 30, 07:51 AM
I had an '84Jeep Cherokee (1st year they were built.) 4 cylinder engine and big air filter housing with the word HURRICANE decaled on it. That was in error. AMC owned Jeep at the time and the old faithful Jeep Hurricane engine that had power willys jeeps for a long time was not the 4 banger in the 84 Cherokee. It was an AMC engine.
Maybe AMC had a bunch of leftover Hurricane air filter housings when they bought Jeep.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 09-30-2023).]