Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 403 posts

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#281

Post by bunabhucan »

Eisenstein wrote: post #279
PaulRobinson wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you can see from video evidence that they were sat aligned and Connolly was not turned. If you are in the room, you might be able to make the shots - although the FBI failed to, and Oswald was a lousy shot - but my main problem is that he could not have moved through the building as needed without being seen by some people, and not by others who did. The photos of Kennedy do not show a small wound in the back of…

What you are saying is that most people are able to deduce proper bullet trajectories through soft targets by watching a single section of film shot from a distance -- and that this ability is so good as to render all of the other evidence moot.

>What you are saying is that

some HN

>people are able to

opine outside their circle of competence.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#282

Post by pliesfan97 »

a2tech wrote: post #225

I used to be passingly interested in the conspiracy part of the JFK assassination until I watched this EXTENSIVE in length and sourced video on the assassination: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DC8tO16xdrY It's all very logical and straightforward.

I personally believe it's somewhat possible that there was some CIA involvement in JFK's assassination. I did not watch the entire video, but the part that addresses potential CIA involvement seems to have 2 main flaws IMO:

1. It only addresses the Vietnam War as a potential motive and "debunks" this motive. Geopolitics is complicated, and there are countless other potential motives, especially surrounding Cuba and the CIA's involvement there (Bay of Pigs, etc). The parts of the video I watched (including part 2) did not seem to address this at all. Eliminating one motive does not by any means eliminate the possibility of CIA involvement.

2. The video's creator seems to assume that CIA's involvement would consist of "hiring" Oswald to perform the assassination and that Oswald would have full awareness of the plans, etc. This is not the only scheme in which a conspiracy may have taken place, and in fact seems like a highly unlikely and unsophisticated scheme. It seems much more likely that Oswald was "used" rather than "hired" and that he was either convinced or coerced to shoot Kennedy. This is how murderous intelligence organizations do their dirty work (the CIA is known to have killed people) - via coercion, power, politics, propaganda, and not via direct orders or contracts. Assuming my theory is correct (of which I do not have certainty), Oswald likely had his own motives to wanting to shoot Kennedy, but it required a conspiracy to actually get him to carry through with it. This model of the relationships and dynamics involved seems entirely foreign to the video's creator and is completely unaddressed.

In general, discourse around the JFK assassination and potential conspiracies focuses way too much on the shooting itself - ballistic physics, positions of possible shooters, analysis of film. This is a complete distraction from the more important question which is around Lee Harvey Oswald's incredibly suspicious relationships and contacts with known CIA people.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#283

Post by KennyBlanken »

Tao3300 wrote: post #261
hyperhopper wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am also skeptical of Landis, but what do you mean about preserving evidence? It's a bullet. It just was next to an explosion that cleared it most most evidence. Then the barrel rifling altered the metal. That would not be harmed by picking it up. Then it went through jfk. Okay, we already know his DNA is on it. The real question is why are you picking up random things from a crime scene and then putting them down i…

> The real question is why are you picking up random things Probably seemed like a good idea at the time. My wife was in car accident once where the airbag deployed. For some reason her immediate reaction was to roll down the window. People in stressful and perilous situations sometimes do things that make no sense.

The gasses generated by an airbag are quite toxic and don't smell very good.

Why wouldn't she open a window?

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#284

Post by 7thaccount »

jimhefferon wrote: post #192
WalterBright wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad kept a diary during his WW2 duty. In his 80's, he read it and was shocked to discover it did not line up with his memories.

I remember with 100 percent clarity doing great in sophomore high school math. I loved it and I went on to get a PhD. Then my mom passed and I got a box of stuff with my name on it from her house. It included my report card. C.

That's because you remember correctly...the simulation just messed up the report card object and accidentally decremented the counter twice.

In all seriousness it's crazy how bad memory is. Like we all have a false version of the truth.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#285

Post by lostNFound »

raylad wrote: post #270

It was the conclusion of the House Select Committee on Assassinations that there was a high probability there were two gunmen. This was based on acoustical analysis of Dallas police radio recordings: https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-repor...

Another commenter linked a video which I’ll re-link[0]. Essentially the conclusion of the HSCA was, as you say, literally entirely based on that recording. If the recording hadn’t been there, the HSCA actually was on the verge of concluding the same as Warren. (In other words, if the recording evidence wasn’t there they would’ve concluded Oswald lone).

The recording was, indeed, later found to not even be from the time of the shots but from an entirely different point in time, after police already noticed Kennedy shot. In that very recording, police officers say things in reaction to the shooting. After those voices, the “shots” from which the conclusion was drawn appear. Painfully obviously, that doesn’t make any sense.

Also the recording was in an entirely different point in space too, as it wasn’t even from a bike in the motorcade, as the HSCA thought but it from a different 3-wheeled-motorcycle stationed where Kennedy would’ve been arriving.

Drawing conclusions from that recording about the Kennedy shooting is probably less reliable than drawing them from the Live Aid concert version recording of Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen.

In summary, after adjusting for that lone error in HSCA, Warren and HSCA concluded the same.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DC8tO16xdrY

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#286

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

hyperhopper wrote: post #226
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Landis' behaviour strikes me as being very peculiar. Shouldn't he have attempted to preserve evidence on the bullet rather than simply putting it into his pocket?

I am also skeptical of Landis, but what do you mean about preserving evidence? It's a bullet. It just was next to an explosion that cleared it most most evidence. Then the barrel rifling altered the metal. That would not be harmed by picking it up. Then it went through jfk. Okay, we already know his DNA is on it. The real question is why are you picking up random things from a crime scene and then putting them down i…

> I am also skeptical of Landis, but what do you mean about preserving evidence?

I don't really know, but it hardly seems like good practise to pick up a bullet. Don't crime scene investigators usually take calibrated pictures of important items such as bullets and often try to determine the trajectory?

There's also the chain of custody to think about - the bullet could easily have been swapped with a different bullet after he left it on the stretcher.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#287

Post by jcpham2 »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #283
Tao3300 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real question is why are you picking up random things Probably seemed like a good idea at the time. My wife was in car accident once where the airbag deployed. For some reason her immediate reaction was to roll down the window. People in stressful and perilous situations sometimes do things that make no sense.

The gasses generated by an airbag are quite toxic and don't smell very good. Why wouldn't she open a window?

I’ve been in a wreck and burned by the hot explosive gases filling those harsh burlap sacks known as air bags; I am opening a window or door ASAP too.

It’s funny how advertising depicts air bags as these soft pillows when they are anything but inviting during the moment of deployment.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#288

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

Aeolun wrote: post #265
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Landis' behaviour strikes me as being very peculiar. Shouldn't he have attempted to preserve evidence on the bullet rather than simply putting it into his pocket?

He was also a 24 year old that had just seen the head of someone very familiar to him explode in front of him. I’m kind of inclined to expect peculiar behavior from him.

Shock is the only explanation that makes any sense to me. However, remaining "largely silent" for 60 years about it implies that there's other factors at play.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#289

Post by colordrops »

kelnos wrote: post #98

Even if Landis is being honest to the best of his ability, this account seems suspect for one simple reason: human memory is incredibly unreliable even in routine cases. Considering the stress and trauma around witnessing and being so close to an awful event like that, as well as the amount of time that has passed, I don't see how we can consider this story to be even remotely reliable. He may truly remember these ev…

This seems like a pretty arbitrary criticism. Do you have any reason to believe that he didn't remember things correctly?

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#290

Post by nativeit »

pseingatl wrote: post #126
xyzelement wrote: post #118

Not directly related to this article, but I found the lone gunman theory much easier to accept after visiting the museum in the former book depository in Dallas. You can look down onto the plaza from the exact spot Oswald shot from, and you can easily imagine how the bullet fired from there would go through JFK and into the governor sitting in front of him. Not that this proves anything, it was just a "oh, I can tang…

I had the opposite feeling. Looking from the window, to your left, a winding road. To your right, the freeway entrance. With a bolt action rifle, Oswald had to shoot, eject the casing, reload, acquire the target of an accelerating vehicle, shoot, eject the casing, reload, acquire the target of an accelerating vehicle and fire again. One of the Marine Corps' top snipers said, "I can't do it." If he can't, how could Os…

They weren’t exactly bullseye hits. He got the bullets in the right vicinity, which is admittedly an impressive feat, but it was pure chance that they managed to strike in a way that caused a lethal blow. If one was going through the effort of conspiring with 1-2 other gunmen, then it should have featured better and more intentional targeting, from spaces anywhere along the motorcade route that wouldn’t be so difficult to enter/exit. Or, if we’re talking about a broader planned conspiracy, use a blunter instrument like an IED or another vehicle, or both. Why opt for a sniper at all? The chances of success seem too little for a professional hit, but about right for an unstable radicalized former soldier looking for revolutionary glory.

Also, the car only started accelerating after the hit was made, and it was fairly axial to the bullet trajectory. I dunno know about you, but I can reload a bolt action rifle without dropping aim in under a second. It’s using the rifle as it was designed to be used.

It wasn’t a good shot. It was a lucky shot. One he clearly didn’t fully prepare to land, otherwise he probably wouldn’t have been arrested shortly after in a nearby movie theater. It was hardly sophisticated, and its success hinged almost entirely on blind luck and circumstance, which is the most difficult scenario to protect against.

Post reply on HN