TX TX - President John F. Kennedy, 46, Dallas, 22 Nov 1963

[Charlot123]

Here is the reaction of the public on that fateful day

 

[Charlot123]

YouTube

PragerU/The brief/

"JFK assassination 62 years later"

(An Interview with Gerald Posner, author of "Case Closed".)

The best explanation why it was Lee Harvey Oswald all along.

Please listen to it, it makes total sense.

Apparently, Oswald left US and was in Mexico City in September (when they first published about JFK's forthcoming trip to Texas). He tried to get to Cuba to fight for the Cuban revolution but the Cubans didn't want him. Obviously. So he returned home on November 9th. To involve him into a conspiracy, he even wasn't in the US!

In general, Posner does a good job debunking the conspiracy theory.

 

[Richard]

The varying estimates of the number of shots fired by witnesses present to hear them are an example of how inaccurate human senses, memory, and testimony can be.

But the forensic evidence can be just as confusing and difficult. To accept the conclusions of the Warren Commission, a single shooter (Lee Harvey Oswald) completely missed with his first shot (a possible squib round)

His second round made 7 wounds on two persons and remained largely intact ) in spite of leaving more lead in Governor Connally than was lost from that "magic" bullet.

The third shot totally disintegrated and made a huge wound in Kennedy's head.

Each of those three shots behaved very differently.

Then, there was yet another person. James Tague who was also wounded after hearing two previous shots.

 

[Charlot123]

The varying estimates of the number of shots fired by witnesses present to hear them are an example of how inaccurate human senses, memory, and testimony can be.

But the forensic evidence can be just as confusing and difficult. To accept the conclusions of the Warren Commission, a single shooter (Lee Harvey Oswald) completely missed with his first shot (a possible squib round)

His second round made 7 wounds on two persons and remained largely intact ) in spite of leaving more lead in Governor Connally than was lost from that "magic" bullet.

The third shot totally disintegrated and made a huge wound in Kennedy's head.

Each of those three shots behaved very differently.

Then, there was yet another person. James Tague who was also wounded after hearing two previous shots.

Posner explains it. There was another tall building nearby and what Oswald didn't know is whether the security had made a post there. He wanted to shoot a president, but he wasn't suicidal. So he made a "snipers nest" in the corner so that his ammo won't be seen from the other building. It all depends on the angles of shooting. He was not a good shooter for his age, btw. I don't know if i can post the link to the video but it sounds reasonable.

What also made it easier for Oswald, we all forget, president Kennedy was wearing a corset so he could not bend over. He raised his hand in response to Jackie's movement after the second shot and it made a better target ((

 

[Richard]

Another difficulty in accepting the Warren Commission finding that Oswald was the only shooter is the timing of the three shots.

Found near the 6th floor snipers's nest window were three expended and ejected shell casings, all linked forensicly to the Carcano rifle bought by Oswald, which was also found nearby on that floor.

A fourth, live round was chambered in the rifle, but no other live rounds or ammo boxes or magazine clips were found in the Book Depository, or at either of Oswald's two residences.

One of the three expended shell casings was further away from the window and its mouth was dented inward - possibly because it had been chambered as an empty, and ejected prior to any live firing?

The timing of the shots was put at between 6 and 8 seconds, based on frames of the Zapruder movie film. And because they wanted to prove that Oswald fired three shots in just over 6 seconds, elaborate tests were conducted employing expert riflemen firing a similar rifle at a moving target and scoring 2 out of three hits. Very few could pass the test initially, but after a number of times, some could do it.

The test "proved" that, although difficult, it "could" be done. But one also could conclude that it would be easier if there were two shooters.

Two fired bullets matched forensicly to Oswald's rifle were recovered. Fragments of one were found on the floor of the Presidential Limo. The other showed up somewhere in Parkland Hospital with a questionable chain of custody.

Could it be that only two shots were fired from Oswald's rifle? Two shots in 6 to 8 seconds would certainly be easier. One, two, or maybe none of those shots could have hit victims. But this would mean at least one more shooter and more shots would be needed.

 

[Lilibet]

This will just be my rambling memories of that day, a couple of months into my freshman year at one of the campuses of the University of California. I was in my dorm room in the late morning when another resident came screaming down the hall “President Kennedy has been shot!” We went down to the dorm living room to watch T.V. At that point he was said to be still alive, so we were hoping for the best. The room filled quickly with students. But soon, JFK had died.

We didn’t know whether to go to classes or not. I had a small political science class led by a teaching assistant and I decided to go. Quite a few of us showed up and we were all in shock. I was only 17 and most others weren’t any older than 18. We had missed all the horrible events of WWII. I will never forget what our TA told us. He reminded us that we are very fortunate in the U.S. that when a president is defeated in an election, or dies or is killed in office, the transfer of power is always peaceful. There is no violence and he is sworn into office uneventfully. Needless to say, his words came to mind on January 6, 2021. But I digress and that was then and it was comforting.

The next few days were filled with news coverage. I remember seeing Jackie in her blood-stained suit next to LBJ as he was sworn in aboard Air Force One in Dallas. Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald. I watched the funeral before going home for Thanksgiving, and I remember little John-John saluting as his father’s coffin rolled by. Heartbreaking. It was a lot to take in. I remember thinking a lot about what Jackie must be feeling.

At the time I wondered if LBJ was behind the assassination, but because he later supported the Civil Rights Act, I decided he must not have been. It was all so confusing and still is.

In 2004, we happened to be in Dallas, just driving around, sightseeing. We weren’t looking for Dealey Plaza, but suddenly, there it was! I knew it immediately, 41 years later, from watching the news in 1963.

By the end of the 1960’s MLK and RFK had also been assassinated, and I’m sure there were other less prominent ones I’ve forgotten. But the shock and sadness of JFK’s assassination remains huge in my memory and my heart.

JMO

 

[Betty P]

This will just be my rambling memories of that day, a couple of months into my freshman year at one of the campuses of the University of California. I was in my dorm room in the late morning when another resident came screaming down the hall “President Kennedy has been shot!” We went down to the dorm living room to watch T.V. At that point he was said to be still alive, so we were hoping for the best. The room filled quickly with students. But soon, JFK had died.

We didn’t know whether to go to classes or not. I had a small political science class led by a teaching assistant and I decided to go. Quite a few of us showed up and we were all in shock. I was only 17 and most others weren’t any older than 18. We had missed all the horrible events of WWII. I will never forget what our TA told us. He reminded us that we are very fortunate in the U.S. that when a president is defeated in an election, or dies or is killed in office, the transfer of power is always peaceful. There is no violence and he is sworn into office uneventfully. Needless to say, his words came to mind on January 6, 2021. But I digress and that was then and it was comforting.

The next few days were filled with news coverage. I remember seeing Jackie in her blood-stained suit next to LBJ as he was sworn in aboard Air Force One in Dallas. Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald. I watched the funeral before going home for Thanksgiving, and I remember little John-John saluting as his father’s coffin rolled by. Heartbreaking. It was a lot to take in. I remember thinking a lot about what Jackie must be feeling.

At the time I wondered if LBJ was behind the assassination, but because he later supported the Civil Rights Act, I decided he must not have been. It was all so confusing and still is.

In 2004, we happened to be in Dallas, just driving around, sightseeing. We weren’t looking for Dealey Plaza, but suddenly, there it was! I knew it immediately, 41 years later, from watching the news in 1963.

By the end of the 1960’s MLK and RFK had also been assassinated, and I’m sure there were other less prominent ones I’ve forgotten. But the shock and sadness of JFK’s assassination remains huge in my memory and my heart.

JMO

Interesting memories, thanks for sharing. It was a difficult and very sad time. As you say, it was also unsettling. No one knew what might happen next, but the transition of power was smooth. There was a big emphasis on keeping things calm, moving forward. Everyone cooperated in that effort.

 

[Charlot123]

.

This will just be my rambling memories of that day, a couple of months into my freshman year at one of the campuses of the University of California. I was in my dorm room in the late morning when another resident came screaming down the hall “President Kennedy has been shot!” We went down to the dorm living room to watch T.V. At that point he was said to be still alive, so we were hoping for the best. The room filled quickly with students. But soon, JFK had died.

We didn’t know whether to go to classes or not. I had a small political science class led by a teaching assistant and I decided to go. Quite a few of us showed up and we were all in shock. I was only 17 and most others weren’t any older than 18. We had missed all the horrible events of WWII. I will never forget what our TA told us. He reminded us that we are very fortunate in the U.S. that when a president is defeated in an election, or dies or is killed in office, the transfer of power is always peaceful. There is no violence and he is sworn into office uneventfully. Needless to say, his words came to mind on January 6, 2021. But I digress and that was then and it was comforting.

The next few days were filled with news coverage. I remember seeing Jackie in her blood-stained suit next to LBJ as he was sworn in aboard Air Force One in Dallas. Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald. I watched the funeral before going home for Thanksgiving, and I remember little John-John saluting as his father’s coffin rolled by. Heartbreaking. It was a lot to take in. I remember thinking a lot about what Jackie must be feeling.

At the time I wondered if LBJ was behind the assassination, but because he later supported the Civil Rights Act, I decided he must not have been. It was all so confusing and still is.

In 2004, we happened to be in Dallas, just driving around, sightseeing. We weren’t looking for Dealey Plaza, but suddenly, there it was! I knew it immediately, 41 years later, from watching the news in 1963.

By the end of the 1960’s MLK and RFK had also been assassinated, and I’m sure there were other less prominent ones I’ve forgotten. But the shock and sadness of JFK’s assassination remains huge in my memory and my heart.

JMO

Thank you for sharing it! It is so interesting to read the memory of someone who lived through it. These are unbelievable, precious memories.

My father, a doctor from the USSR, was in NYC, training in a big hospital, when it happened. He said that his whole group was sent home, and their US colleagues were very much scared for dad’s group, and protective of them.

My memories are from later years. In hindsight, it seems that Johnson wasn’t much liked in my family, but I don’t know whether it was the reaction to an average guy replacing a charismatic one, or simply because Vietnam started soon. I had to form my own opinion about everyone later. My parents, living in USSR, felt that JFK’s assassination was a conspiracy. I think it was based solely on how the Warren’s commission presented their report.

Anything can be a conspiracy, but my question is, is it possible that Oswald could have done it alone? Honestly, on the photos, he has “the look”. Not of a fall guy, but of a school or a presidential shooter.

And then, one can remember Hinckley. Hinckley planned assassination twice, first of Carter and then of Reagan. His motivation was totally lunatic. And yet, he did seriously wound President Reagan and three more people. That was in the time of much better security than with JFK, one can assume.

So I think such people can act alone.

 

[Richard]

Lee Oswald was a very intelligent person, but in many ways he was a "loose cannon" and a loner capable of acting alone.

He certainly would not be the sort of person one would choose to be included as a team player in a carefully planned assassination.

UNLESS... a part of the plan was for him to be killed and blamed as the lone assassin.

 

[Richard]

All that is needed for a "conspiracy" would be for two or more persons to be involved. If it was believed or proven that there were more than one shooter, then you have a valid reason to support a conspiracy theory.

There certainly were attempts by various agencies or individuals to manipulate evidence or hide it after the fact. But was this to keep the public from doubting that the assassination was the work of a lone individual (Lee Harvey Oswald)? Or was it just due to incompetence or to efforts to limit or eliminate criticism? Oswald was tracked and watched by the FBI and the CIA prior to the assassination, but all that was covered up or downplayed in the aftermath. Oswald was interviewed for 12 hours by the Dallas Police, and yet no tape recording or transcript exists. Forensic evidence disappeared and evidence chain of custody was broken.

A case could be made for autopsy reports and evidence being faked or for conclusions regarding tests of evidence having been incorrectly reported.

The Congressional Investigation into the Assassination concluded that there was likely another shooter but did not identify him or provide solid proof.

 

[Charlot123]

All that is needed for a "conspiracy" would be for two or more persons to be involved. If it was believed or proven that there were more than one shooter, then you have a valid reason to support a conspiracy theory.

There certainly were attempts by various agencies or individuals to manipulate evidence or hide it after the fact. But was this to keep the public from doubting that the assassination was the work of a lone individual (Lee Harvey Oswald)? Or was it just due to incompetence or to efforts to limit or eliminate criticism? Oswald was tracked and watched by the FBI and the CIA prior to the assassination, but all that was covered up or downplayed in the aftermath. Oswald was interviewed for 12 hours by the Dallas Police, and yet no tape recording or transcript exists. Forensic evidence disappeared and evidence chain of custody was broken.

A case could be made for autopsy reports and evidence being faked or for conclusions regarding tests of evidence having been incorrectly reported.

The Congressional Investigation into the Assassination concluded that there was likely another shooter but did not identify him or provide solid proof.

I absolutely understand how a political assassination can be pushed on a fall guy. Take Kirov's assassination orchestrated by Stalin in 1934. Kirov, the party boss of Leningrad, a major philanderer, had an affair with Leonid Nikolayev (the assassin's) wife Milda Draule, and Nikolayev was an Oswald-type loser. He was probably persuaded to do it, another loose cannon. After the assassination, all potential organizers and participants were slowly and masterfully removed. But, everyone understood the motive. Sergei Kirov, the charismatic party boss of Leningrad, was viewed as a potential alternative to Stalin. Moreover, at the 17th Party Congress (1934), many delegates privately voted for Kirov over Stalin, which sealed Kirov's fate. So "who profits" was obvious.

This is a different story. I can't quite understand the motive for JFK's assassination. Who really profited? Yes, I understand that not everyone may have liked the Kennedys. (One thing that is incredibly hard to understand for a European, why it even matters, but Kennedy was the first Catholic president, so there is that, too.) My only idea is, LBJ might have seemed more convenient for someone? But that more convenient? Ultimately, LBJ led exactly the same politic. Politically, what am I missing?

Unless it was some local Texas oil baron, who wanted to bet on a local, LBJ? No doubt, in this case LBJ was expected to serve in glory for two terms. No one expected Vietnam to turn so deadly. Instead, it all backfired, and LBJ became "the forgotten one"; it may be unfair to him.

But "the local" theory doesn't fit either.

 

[Richard]

There is no doubt that Jack Ruby shot and killed Lee Harvey Oswald on 34 November 1963. But what was his real motivation?

He claimed that he wanted to spare Mrs. Kennedy the pain of returning to Dallas for a trial.

He was clearly stalking Oswald prior to shooting him. He can be seen in several photos inside police headquarters posing as a reporter and at one point corrects a police spokesman about Oswald's connection to a pro Castro group earlier in New Orleans.

 

[PrairieWind]

There is no doubt that Jack Ruby shot and killed Lee Harvey Oswald on 34 November 1963. But what was his real motivation?

He claimed that he wanted to spare Mrs. Kennedy the pain of returning to Dallas for a trial.

He was clearly stalking Oswald prior to shooting him. He can be seen in several photos inside police headquarters posing as a reporter and at one point corrects a police spokesman about Oswald's connection to a pro Castro group earlier in New Orleans.

Exactly. Is his claim he wanted to spare Jackie the pain believable? I guess it is possible, but don't I buy it. And I seem to recall he later said he had more to say after he was diagnosed with cancer. I tend to lean to the idea that Oswald really was the shooter and the ONLY shooter. But Ruby's involvement makes me think that Oswald really was the patsy he claimed to be and had to be silenced.

 

[Charlot123]

Exactly. Is his claim he wanted to spare Jackie the pain believable? I guess it is possible, but don't I buy it. And I seem to recall he later said he had more to say after he was diagnosed with cancer. I tend to lean to the idea that Oswald really was the shooter and the ONLY shooter. But Ruby's involvement makes me think that Oswald really was the patsy he claimed to be and had to be silenced.

But then, Oswald attempted to assassinate General Edwin Walker in April of 1963. It is unlikely that he was masterminded to do it.

I honestly think that he killed JFK himself. But was he a loose cannon who was easily manipulated to do it, or was it his own idea?

Oswald returned from Mexico on October 2, 1963. If anything, he must have been “handled” shortly afterwards. I wonder if Marina, his wife, mentioned someone visiting their house, or Oswald going somewhere in the days before the assassination.

About Jackie - the country felt very compassionate towards her after the assassination. But would sparing her the pain sound like a good motive? IMHO, not really, unless Ruby was infatuated with her as a celebrity and killing Oswald was an attention-seeking gesture. As far as I know, however, there is no evidence of Ruby being infatuated with Jackie.

 

[rob525]

I have read a few things recently regarding mob boss Sam Giancana. His potential role in all of this is intriguing. Also, I believe that he made statements about being involved in the assassination of JFK. Further, given that Giancana was murdered just before he was to testify before a committee that investigated covert operations, is also compelling.

 

[Marie A]

I have read a few things recently regarding mob boss Sam Giancana. His potential role in all of this is intriguing. Also, I believe that he made statements about being involved in the assassination of JFK. Further, given that Giancana was murdered just before he was to testify before a committee that investigated covert operations, is also compelling.

Yep, reinforces my earlier note about Frank Sinatra orchestrating the hit on JFK.
That’s what insiders in the Italian community in Dallas have said.
They were besties and Frank was royally angry (to put it mildly) about being discarded by Kennedy after working hard and pulling in favors to get him elected.
Sinatra was humiliated by Kennedy and angry about it.
All imho

 

[everlearning]

I have read a few things recently regarding mob boss Sam Giancana. His potential role in all of this is intriguing. Also, I believe that he made statements about being involved in the assassination of JFK. Further, given that Giancana was murdered just before he was to testify before a committee that investigated covert operations, is also compelling.

My husband believes the assassination was a mob hit. They helped him get elected, and he turned on them. He allowed and encouraged Bobby to investigate them. He was their friend, until he wasn't. How they orchestrated the hit and even how they chose Oswald is a mystery that is interesting.