General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Has DU Turned The Corner On The JFK CT BS? Apparently So. [View all]Samantha
(9,314 posts)What the Warren Commission failed to prove was that he acted alone. It is very difficult, usually impossible, to prove a negative, and they were unsuccessful in doing so. I believe Oswald fired two shots at Kennedy and missed both times. The second sniper also in the 6th floor depository almost simultaneously with Oswald's first shot fired the second shot, hitting Kennedy from the back. Oswald fired a third shot and hit Connelly. A sniper on the grassy knoll, stationed there in case the two shooters in the book depository failed to accomplish their mission, the killing of the President, saw when the limo approached Kennedy was woulded but still erect, fired the kill shot from the front. This was the shot that exploded President Kennedy's head. All four shots were fired in less than 7 seconds.
Other prints were also found in the sixth floor, but prints the FBI found but deemed not clear enough to be matched, were left unidentified. 35 years after the shooting, one of those prints was matched by two expert independent fingerprint analysts (one in the United States, one abroad) who were given the prints blindly, meaning no clue as to the case which was being investigated, and no suggestion as to whom the fingerprints belonged). Both came back with the name Mac Wallace, a long-time hit man who took assignments from Clark, Johnson's long-time attorney. He was a hit man, and he was later convicted of another murder.
The theory of the grassy knoll has not been discredited to my satisfaction. Several eye witnesses said there was a shot from that area, and immediately after the incident agents ran toward that spot. One eye witness who said two shots were fired almost simultaneously and he thought there was a shot from the grassy knoll was dismissed. And the theory of a shooter on the knoll is not inconsistent with the wounds.
I think it is totally fine for each of us to process what we feel is a very possible alternative, that is our option if we discard the findings of the official commission. Probably none of us will live long enough to see the further emerging of the literal truth of President Kennedy's assassination. But I do feel it is important when we discuss this issue to do so without overreacting to those with opposing opinions. (Not that you did so, your post was polite and reasoned).
I think it is important to note that Jacqueline Kennedy did not accept the Warren Commission's report. She contracted with an investigative agency abroad to quietly investigate her husband's death. She did receive a final report from the, which report she sealed for 50 years. I believe that means 50 years not from her passing, but 50 years from the death of the last of her children. I believe she did that to protect the security of the Kennedy children. But it raises the question if that foreign investigative group agreed with the Warren Commission's findings, why the need to seal the report for 50 some years?
Additionally, Bobby Kennedy changed the plans he had to go back to Massachusetts, retiring from politics and picking up on his law practice again. He made these plans before the President died. After President Kennedy's death, we saw a reversal in course. While he publicly stood behind the Commission's findings, he privately believed the only way he would ever learn the truth of his brother's assassination was to win the Presidency, a spot from where he could access all documents and evidence not released to the public, and he could wield the power of the President to gather additional information. Why did he do that? Were he and Jacqueline simply conspiracy theorists themselves or were they grieving relatives who simply had to learn the truth about what happened that day John Kennedy died?
Sam