New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory • Hacker News Board

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

#341

Post by flagrant_taco » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 2:37 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #322

pliesfan97 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…

> It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality.

Unfortunately this isn't limited to conspiracy theories. We spent the better part of the years with leaders and scientists forcing similarly baseless explanations down or throat rather than taking the time to collect the data that actually supported the politically favorable talking points. There were countless fantasies made up to explain the risks of the specific virus, efficacy of masks, net benefit of vaccination, etc.

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

#342

Post by emmelaich » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 2:39 AM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #25

becquerel wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crazy that he chose to keep this secret for six decades. I wonder what possible reason he could have to bring it up now. Hmm, hmm, hmm.

> Crazy that he chose to keep this secret for six decades. I wonder what possible reason he could have to bring it up now. Hmm, hmm, hmm. Maybe because he's 88 years old and likely to die soon? More or less a deathbed confession. Consider that Watergate's "Deep Throat" Mark Felt only came forward at age 91.

Speaking of Mark Felt, this article is fascinating.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/09/10/watergate...

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

#343

Post by defen » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 2:51 AM UTC

philistine wrote: post #324

pseingatl wrote: post #122

The article suggests that Landis' come to Jesus moment came after reading Josih Thompson's Six Seconds in Dallas. Three years ago Thompson wrote another book, Last Seconds in Dallas in which he and an audio expert examined recently released magnetophone recordings. The inescapable conclusion is that there were two gunmen.

The second gunmen doesn't require a conspiracy to explain. Oswald fired two shots: one in Kennedy's back which did not fully penetrate, and one through his neck which hit Connally. Then, in the ensuing confusion, a Secret Service agent following the motorcade accidentally discharged his AR-15 in the back of Kennedy's head, killing him. The agent who pulled the trigger on the ground doesn't even need to realize he had…

How would that agent eventually account for the missing round?

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

#344

Post by fsckboy » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 3:02 AM UTC

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.

Oswald Acted Alone... you mean lone gunman acted alone? or do you mean nobody else with prior knowledge?

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

#345

Post by lucas_membrane » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 3:21 AM UTC

morby wrote: post #5

morby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would probably add some major points to this synopsis. The bullet was believed to have been on Connally’s stretcher. It is the “magic bullet”. The pristine bullet that was supposed to have hit JFK and Connally both. The assumption here is that it did not penetrate through JFK. That it came from the wound in his back. This would upend the investigative findings that the bullet in this back was responsible for the ne…

To add to that. The author details how this new detail subsequently alters the version of events. Namely it suggests that the bullet that hit JFK in the back and hit Connally were two different bullets and that they could not have been fired at that rate (the rate suggested by the video evidence) with the weapon used by Oswald

> could not have been fired at that rate

The stories all say that the FBI reported the minimum time to fire that rifle was 2.25 seconds. How was that determined? How can a supposedly experimental result like that have no error bars? Was it determined by repeated firings of the gun found in the sniper's nest, or by another similar gun presumed to be an exact duplicate (of a 20-year old mail order gun?) for purposes of that measurement? It is known that Oswald spent some considerable time (maybe and hour or several, I don't remember) 'dry firing' the rifle the night before. Could he perhaps have developed speed superior to that of whomever the FBI asked to do that experiment? Has the 2.25 second minimum ever been replicated? How could the person trying to fire the gun as fast as possible for the FBI ever have as much adrenaline flowing as Oswald, the man who had previously tried and failed to kill General Walker must have had.

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

#346

Post by ufmace » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 4:03 AM UTC

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #116

koolba wrote: post #2

> Landis saw and did something that he has kept secret for six decades, he says now. He claims he spotted a bullet resting on the top of the back of the seat. He says he picked it up, put it in his pocket, and brought it into the hospital. Then, upon entering Trauma Room No. 1 (at that stage, he was the only nonmedical person in the room besides Mrs. Kennedy, and both stayed for only a short period), he insists, he p…

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?

Note that he was pretty young and his only "law enforcement" experience was from working in the Secret Service. Presumably all of his training and experience was for things involving VIP protection activities. It shouldn't be surprising that he didn't know much at all about crime scene investigation.

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

#347

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 4:04 AM UTC

irrational wrote: post #326

mulmen wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…

This seems to presuppose the “inevitable conclusion” is true.

[deleted]

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

#348

Post by lucas_membrane » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 4:05 AM UTC

JohnBooty wrote: post #57

koolba wrote: post #2

> Landis saw and did something that he has kept secret for six decades, he says now. He claims he spotted a bullet resting on the top of the back of the seat. He says he picked it up, put it in his pocket, and brought it into the hospital. Then, upon entering Trauma Room No. 1 (at that stage, he was the only nonmedical person in the room besides Mrs. Kennedy, and both stayed for only a short period), he insists, he p…

The revelation is that the bullet was not lodged in JFK and did not fall out while shaking about on the gurney. I'm sorry, this is not correct. This pristine bullet was previously thought to have been found on Connally's stretcher, not JFK's stretcher. It was thought that this bullet traveled into JFK from the rear, exited his throat, and then wounded Connally. If Landis' claim is true, that would upend entirely the…

> If Landis' claim is true, that would upend entirely the Warren commission's findings.

Not so. Three shots were fired according to about 85% of the witnesses. Previously, we had a missing bullet. The bullet Landis found might be that missing bullet, previously explained as having vanished someplace in Dealey Plaza. Oswald may have fired it while his view of the limo was partially obscured by the tree. If it made some slight contact with the tree, it might have caused the small bit of flying debris that nicked one of the spectators, then continuing its flight at a lesser speed, hit Kennedy's back, popped out of his back, and been found by Landis. The other magic bullet the Warren Commission may have figured out pretty accurately. Which bullet was the one found at Parkland? Given all the unanticipated mayhem that day, it could have been either one, but one would not expect that both of two wandering bullets would have been found. Many's the detective who has been baffled by red-headed identical twins.

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

#349

Post by mulmen » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 4:15 AM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #330

mulmen wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…

>But none of this is well reasoned. Conjecture: A is not the culprit because motive xyz does not check out. Reasoning: That doesn't exonerate A, who could have other motives. Without agreeing with it, that looks perfectly well reasoned to me. Compelling evidence exonerating the CIA you say? Well ok, I'll believe that when I see it, just like any other evidence from gravity onward. The CIA's docs haven't been declassi…

The meta argument is the one which is unreasonable. Forming reasonable small arguments is easy. People engage them easily. But because so many can be created so cheaply it’s possible for people’s minds to cloud.

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

#350

Post by ufmace » Mon, Sep 11, 2023, 4:25 AM UTC

Ylpertnodi wrote: post #97

circumlocution wrote: post #51

To those who haven't seen it, I'd really recommend Lemmino's video on the assassination https://youtu.be/5u7euN1HTuU?feature=shared He dives pretty deep into the details, and it helped me form my own opinion of what probably happened

What is your own opinion of what probably happened?

I watched it as well. I don't have a strong opinion on what actually happened, but the details in the video of how LHO came to be employed at the book depository and his movements in the days preceding the assassination make it seem pretty improbable that his position there and the assassination were part of some carefully coordinated plan.

For example, if there were actually multiple gunmen in different locations, who all fired within a few seconds, they would have to have had some way to coordinate not only the fact that they would shoot at the motorcade that day, but to precisely synchronize exactly when they all fired. How would they do that? Did LHO even have a watch? Were there other gunmen sitting around somewhere with their guns ready and on target and fingers on triggers, ready to fire within a split second of when some other shooter fired?

I would also note, I've watched training videos on how to respond to mass shooter situations. One of the main points is to discount any claims of additional shooters in other locations until you hear shots yourself. It seems it's quite common in mass shooter situations for witnesses to falsely report additional shooters in other locations.