General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Justice for JFK [View all]stopbush
(24,393 posts)I find that extremely strange coming from a person who says they have read the WCR, especially when you term my relating evidence that was scientifically tested and is well documented and that more than fulfills what qualifies as evidence in law enforcement and court trials as my "smearing" people.
Your statement that no one who wasn't there can ever know the facts in the case is mind boggling. One doesn't need to have been there to know that fact: a Manicher Carcano rifle was found at the TSBD. No one needs to have been there to know that fact: ownership of the rifle was immediately traced to Oswald. No one needs to have been there to fact: know the specific lot of Western Cartridge Company bullets that were found in the rifle, in the spent shells on the floor of the TSBD, or the stretcher bullet were all purchased by Oswald. One need not have been there to fact: know that Oswald's palm print was found on that MC rifle on the part of the barrel that was covered by the stock when the rifle was assembled. One didn't need to be there to know any of that because it was all discovered through great police work. It was all documented in the WCR. And the WCR still exists for anyone to read, any time they so desire.
Many people weren't "there" when JFK was elected president. Should they doubt he was elected? Or are there enough facts in the case to take JFK's election out of the realm of theory and speculation?
The only thing I am smearing is the abject and willing ignorance of people in this case, the kind of ignorance that one sees on display throughout this thread, ie: like stating that the bubble top was bullet proof, or that Ruby died shortly after killing Oswald, and on and on the merry-go-round of willing ignorance goes.
If one was to read only your posts, one would think that the WCR was utterly devoid of facts and evidence in this case, when the thing is absolutely loaded with evidence. Overwhelming, mind-boggling reams of evidence. The kind of evidence that would have convicted Oswald in a court of law had 90% of it gone missing. The case is just that broadly proven...and air tight.
Yes, Oswald killing JFK is a theory, the same well that gravity or evolution is a theory, which is to say that said theory is a scientifically based and tested theory. Or, as Wiki puts it, "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment."
The WCR laid out the facts as facts. The WCR laid out speculation as speculation.
As far as HSCA, yes, they reached a different conclusion than the WC. But they based that conclusion on evidence that has since been falsified to the very standards that the lead investigator of the HSCA said it would need to falsified to to discredit the evidence. To continue to say that the HSCA believed that there was a 4th bullet fired makes about as much sense today as believing in limbo because the Catholic Church said it existed for centuries. Well, the Catholic Church finally came out and said limbo didn't exist. They could do that because the RCC is still in existence. The HSCA isn't in existence and hasn't been for decades. What really needs to be done is to reconvene the HSCA and correct their findings based on new evidence and falsification of the evidence they erroneously believed.
As far as anyone else having the incentive to kill JFK, you're right - of course others had the incentive. Many had a helluva lot more incentive than did Oswald. But having an incentive or a desire proves nothing. As Jackie Kennedy herself bemoaned when she heard of Oswald's arrest, "He (JFK) didn't even have the satisfaction of being killed for civil rights. It had to be some silly little Communist."
Yes, it would have given JFK's death some kind of meaning were he done in by the mob or Castro or the Russians or SPECTRE. That would have provided some balance to offset the gravitas of a sitting president being murdered. That's what drives so many people to not accept what the facts in the case show - that JFK was killed by an insignificant nobody named Lee Harvey Oswald. It just doesn't balance out in our minds.
But life is full of unbalance, like when the shuttle exploded on lift off because it literally blew a gasket (that is what an O Ring is, after all). You know, for want of a nail, etc.
There's evidence in this case. Tons of evidence. I choose to believe the science behind the evidence, if for no other reason that somebody actually had to do some real work gathering and testing that evidence, as opposed to pulling some CT out of one's ass, and believing that said ass-sourced theory resides on the same level as real evidence.
If that's "smearing" people, have at it.