Originally posted by LightAssassin
reply to post by Illustronic
Why does he have to be using a standard gun? This is CIA, why would it be a standard gun? What covert weapons were they using against the Russians
during the Cold War? Why does everyone, on a subject so touchy, JUST LIKE 9/11, just completely rule out the least likely explanation when so many
factors point to it?
Either way, digital media can be manipulated, we will never know the truth and always continue to speculate, wasting yet even more time on a subject
that really doenst matter anymore, especially when the loose ends are now pretty much tied up.
You've got Secret Service being stood down from the motorcade moments before, you have suits filming the incident like cold-blooded killers, you've
got 2 front passengers exhibiting strange behaviour, reacting to whatever initial distress JFK was in, and you've got other factors which point to the
driver having a hand in the incident...yet people refuse to believe that their government would do something like that, just ike their government
sacrificing the lives of a mere 3000 americans, for what, Gold, Money, Money, Gold, Opinions, Sympathy, Peoples Rights, Momentum to go to War, To gain
Cash rich Opium Fields of Afghanistan, and yet another strategical chess piece on the World Map....
I give up...this will be the last JFK thread I ever visit, sure, some will be glad.
I used to believe that the driver did it. About 10 years ago. But I wisened up. First of all, the videos we have now are clearer and you can see what
looks to be his left hand resting at his side. You can also see that what many people thought was a gun was actually the top of the head of the guy
sitting next to the driver. Either the videos were changed, the left hand is misidentified with something else, or we have to take what we have and go
with the facts. I choose to go with the facts until they're shown to be mistaken.
1) Witnesses said the driver slowed down during the critical moments and we know from the videos he's not going fast. Now 10 years ago I did some
research and found that the driver SHOULD have been driving faster. By staying slow as he did he was not being responsible the way the secret service
expects of him. He even looks back at the president as though he doesn't know what's going on. What a fool.
There's something else I'm remembering but it's not clear to me. The driver is still suspicious to me.
Anyway, we have also looked at the image of Oswald where he's holding that rifle. Many people in the past said that it was doctored to connect him
with the crime. But recent investigations have proven this claim to be false. We know that the shadows and lighting cast in the image are accurate.
It's highly unlikely that the image which shows him holding his rifle at his side is bogus. It looks to be genuine. So right there it makes me suspect
that Oswald may indeed have been one of the gunmen like we've been told all along.
I think there's a decent chance of more gunmen. Sometimes I wonder whether the russians or the cubans or someone else did it and the reason we stopped
investigations and settled for Oswald was because we didn't want to ruin relations further or hold back progress. So we cut the process and went home
with it for different reasons. Not much longer after that we had Vietnam, so I'm sure they had their reasons for wanting to get it over with. I'm not
saying this is all there is to it, but I think that it's a part of it. They wanted to conserve their energies.
You know, I wouldn't be surprised if oneday we know hte truth and it's not that far from the Warren Commision conclusions. I don't think the Warren
Commission will turn out to be conspirators. They, like us, didn't have all of hte information. I think that the truth is somewhere inbetween.
There're likely pieces of this mystery that will never be uncovered. And then there're things we're going to find out that will clear some of the
mystery and make us realize that we never had the full story so it's understandable why so many far flung ideas were peddled.
When people don't have all the answers, they tend to fill in the holes with their prejudices and expectations. But more than that, it's human nature
to explain the unexplainable. I think that having more of the facts would benefit us greatly in our search for truth, but I don't think that we'll
come out the other end any different than we're now.
You see, we'll always be limited in knowledge. We'll always fill in the holes with our expectations. Truth is a good thing. But again.... humans are
humans. Truth doesn't change that fact. Money doesn't change it. Good looks don't. UFOs can't change it. God can't. We're hopeless to change
edit on 15-7-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-7-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason