Since tomorrow is the anniversary of the JFK assassination, i thought i'd throw it out and see what people thought.

Personally, I LOVE conspiracy theories, but the more i look into them, they almost all fall apart. I think Oswald acted alone. For a bit, i was intrigued by the "smoking gun" theory that a secret service agent accidentally had his gun go off, but i dont think the evidence supports it.

And on a more serious note, for ya'll that were alive when it happened--what was the experience like?

I was but merely a concept. The world would not be graced with my presence for another year and a half, or so.

Kennedy discovered the “truth” that an alien spacecraft was found at Roswell, and was killed by the government for knowing too much.

http://www.ibtimes.com/crazy-kennedy-ass...go-away-1479002

fixed

I like the "where were you when you heard the news" aspects of JFK assassination forum threads.

I was standing in a second grade class drinking fountain line after the afternoon recess at Eastland Elementary in Fort Worth, Texas when I heard teachers Mrs. Dwyer and Mrs. Messer whispering about it. It was a bright, clear, and warm November day when I walked home from school to find my mother glued to the television.

I remember the images of Washington D.C. seen on the screen throughout that weekend. We had spent two weeks in Washington D.C. the previous summer and the various landmarks and street scenes looked familiar.

I was vexed on Saturday morning when Captain Kangaroo and Mighty Mouse were preempted by news coverage.

Conspiracy theories? I think there is more than meets the eye to the circumstances surrounding the event. The only thing I could add is that a cheaply-scoped Italian 6.5 Carcano rifle and military full-patch (full metal jacket - non-expanding) bullets would be one of the poorest choices for sniping one could make. Oswald was rated a marksman in the Marines, not so hot really. The rifle uses the most feeble 6.5 military cartridge of several 6.5 caliber cartridges developed and used by different nations. The bolt is rough and difficult to cycle quickly when shooting a rapid-fire string, double so with the interference of a scope cobbled onto the top of the rifle's receiver. The trigger pull on the typical Carcano is horrendous to the point of disturbing aim. The rifle uses a curious "gain" twist method of rifling which means the twist rate starts out slow and tightens as the rifling reaches the muzzle. This didn't contribute to fine accuracy and the rifles are known to be not particularly accurate. Would be a good cheap way to arm a chump groomed for the occasion.

I acquired one of these rifles years ago. It was in tip-top condition and with a sparkling bore. Shot from a bench rest with excellent Norman ammunition it offered 5-shot groups at 100 yards measuring about 12 inches. Yeah, one foot! After playing with it a bit, I traded it off in disgust.

Yeah, Oswald could have hit a moving target in a car 87 or so yards away twice out of three tries. Could have, but I'm skeptical. Been to the Sixth Floor museum on several occasions and looked out on Elm Street from the same perspective Oswald had. I'm a high-power rifle competitor from way back. I just don't know for sure about the story.

Personal observations in the game fields considered while watching the unedited Zapruder film makes me believe a bullet that was fired from in front of the limousine smacked home when Kennedy was hit a second time. I'm no forensic ballistics expert but all this business about "hydraulic jetting of ejecta" from the wound or "involuntary muscle contractions" thrusting the head back even though struck from behind don't square in my mind. I feel the second shot was from a rifle significantly more authoritative than a paltry 6.5X52 Italian Carcano; something more on the order of a .30-06 with expanding bullets.

The whole business about Oswald being rubbed out by Jack Ruby stinks to high heaven too. It's certainly possible that there was more to that event than only a vengeful Kennedy admirer taking things into his own hands.

read the novel The Third Bullet by Stephen Hunter. While fiction, it offers an interesting take on this.

I don't think Oswald acted alone...but i also think whomever he worked with is just as dead as Oswald, so we'll never know.

The show about the third bullet coming (accidentally) from the Secret Service agent was very interesting and seemed at least somewhat plausible. Like most things of this nature, i'm sure we'll never know for certain though.

I think the biggest hole in most conspiracy theories is keeping people quite. Most CT's require a significant amount of people to be involved, to have seen something, or to have been indirectly part of some process. Thus most CTs require everyone around to be either ignorant of their part in the process or aware of their part and keep quite. That just doesn't happen. Not even Goodell can keep his staff quite. The President's staffs have traditionally come out and spilled beans that they don't want spilled. It is just pretty much impossible.

yeah, but i think there's two main things that make it unlikely

1) no one really reacted to it. If it had happened, you would think that another secret service agent would have tackled him (they wouldn't know immediately it was an accident) or there would be multiple witnesses who saw it (and not just smelt smoke)

2) there are stills from the bronson film that show the moment of impact, and it's pretty convincing that he was sitting down at the time. This is significant because it means for the theory to be true, he would have had to shoot through the windshield and shattered it.

As to 1), i could see a scenario where no one noticed (perhaps)....i mean, it would have been an accident and no one is anticipating a shot coming from there...not saying that that blows a hole in your argument, just saying.

2) is harder to refute. That's interesting.

In my younger days, I spent (too much) spare time looking into the possibilities. I had always believed in a shot from the grassy knoll, because as a physics student, the head flying back did not mean a shot from behind. But then I watched the entire piece by the ballistics expert/hunter/'gun guy' who showed pretty convincingly that the last bullet could really have come from the assault rifle the SS agent pulled up from the follow-up car. And that would put the finishing touches on a real tragedy.

At least I'm convinced Oswald couldn't have fired ALL those shots.

Re: #2) If I remember, the SS agent was just about standing by the time he had the weapon pointed forward.

adding #3) the wounds also match the ballistics of the bullet that gun would have fired, hollow point coming from behind?

Did you see that '3rd bulett' special, raitch?

I despise Keith Hernandez

There must have been a second spitter

The one about the Secret Service agent possibly being the "3rd shooter"? Yes, i saw that one (but it's been a while).

But what was everyone who has posted here in this thread doing on November 22, 1963?

You must account for yourself on that day or else you might be considered to be a part of a conspiracy.

I wasn't even a twinkle in my daddy's eyes yet. Shoot my parents were not even married yet.

While not a contribution to the conspiracy theory, Stephen King's "11/22/63" imagines how different the world would be if someone went back in time a prevented his assassination.

I was in 2nd grade and sitting outside during recess when the principal rushed past saying the President had been shot. We all went inside, pulled the black blinds(cold war days)down and sat quietly with our heads down until time to go home.
It was scary not understanding what was going to happen next.

You have a few typos there chief.

Your argument is hence invalid.

Its clearly a valid argument given the source. Just wanted to help him out-I know how he is very particular about spelling, grammar, etc.

Shouldn't that be "It's"? Just trying to be helpful.

The dash (after out) is confusing as well.

Dashes indicate a pause in thought Ed. Sorry it's confusing.

I wonder whether Oswald's intended target was might actually have been Governor Connolly, not President Kennedy. He had a grudge against Connolly when Connolly was Secretary of the Navy because the Navy refused to give Oswald an honorable discharge.