ebehere
JFK Murder Part 21
Sat Jan 27, 2007 18:18

 
least 2.3 seconds to fire two shots. Even if Kennedy was shot as early as Z-210, that would still be only a 28 frame time span, or 1.53 seconds. Therefore, Oswald apparently could not have shot both Kennedy and Connally. Logically this left the Warren Commission four options: abandon the lone gunman theory, assume that Oswald somehow managed to hit the President while shooting through the tree, lower the 2.3 second estimate of the time required to operate the rifle mechanism, or assume that a single bullet struck both Kennedy and Connally. The Commission took the fourth option, known as the "single bullet hypothesis," and concluded that three shots were fired within a 4.8 to 7 second time lapse, and that at least one of the three probably missed the target, although they could not determine with certainty which of the three missed....

Since the Warren Commission elected not to extend the time frame in this way, they concluded that the entire assassination took place between frames Z-210 and Z-313, or a time span of 5.62 seconds, just enough time to get off three shots. Any competent gunman would have had the rifle already cocked for the first shot, in which case the bolt would have been operated only twice and the absolute minimum time expended operating the bolt would have been 4.6 seconds. But if four shots were fired, the rifle would have been cocked three times requiring 6.9 seconds. So, if four shots were fired there must have been more than one gunman at Dealey Plaza. Of course, if the Commission had accepted the possibility that the first shot was fired through the tree at Z-166, then their estimate of 5.62 seconds could be extended by 2.4 seconds to about 8 seconds, more than enough time for a lone gunman to get off even four shots.



(12) Fred Litwin, Fair Play Magazine, Intellectual Dishonesty in the JFK Assassination (March, 1995)

The critics of the Warren Commission claim there was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. If we assume they are correct, then exactly how big was the conspiracy to kill JFK? Are we talking about one assassin with an accomplice or are we talking about something larger? If one were to believe the current literature, we are faced with not just "something larger" but a monster conspiracy that consists of several assassins, several accomplices, and the destruction and forgery of vital evidence. The critics have constructed a conspiracy so massive that it ultimately falls of its own weight.

Where did such a monster conspiracy come from? In the sixties, the critical literature pointed out the many failings of the Warren Commission. The most effective book of that decade, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher, highlighted the many inconsistencies in the evidence and the many unanswered questions about the assassination. Her book quickly went out of print and became an underground bestseller -- photocopies were widely sold within the assassination research community. Meagher went out of her way to ask more questions than to provide answers.

In the seventies, the critical literature started to look at the political undertones of a possible conspiracy (especially after Watergate and the revelations of CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro) that ultimately led to a new investigation. That investigation, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), emphasized the scientific side of the assassination and concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald had indeed fired and killed Kennedy. In addition, the HSCA concluded, largely on the basis of the acoustics evidence, that a gunman on the grassy knoll fired at Kennedy (but missed). The HSCA addressed many of the issues raised by the critics in the sixties.

Since then, the literature has taken on a disturbing tone -- one that rejects any piece of evidence contrary to findings of conspiracy. If the autopsy X-rays and photos show evidence of a single head-shot from the rear, well, they must be fakes. If the wounds on Kennedy's body are consistent with a single-gunman, well, the body must have been altered. If the neutron activation analysis shows the single-bullet theory to be correct, well, the evidence has been tampered with. And, if you do not like the conclusions of a professional panel, well, they must have ties to the government. One could go on and on. This is extremely dangerous.

This development is exactly opposite to the legitimate process of theory-building and testing. In the clash between evidence and theories, theories have to be discarded. It's true that evidence is often weak and open to multiple interpretations, but to argue that evidence is fraudulent is to undermine the possibility that any theory might turn out to be "true". . . To argue in such a style is to cause the collapse of the entire empirical edifice of assassinology. However weak, evidence could at least refute theories; now the evidence can't even do that.

The critics are practising intellectual dishonesty on a massive scale. The conspiracy they paint is too big. One must remember that the Watergate cover-up failed despite being run by a sitting President. Iran-Contra also failed despite a sitting (albeit sleeping) President that gave free rein to his administration. Yet, we are to believe that a conspiracy of multiple gunmen, massive forgery and tampering of evidence, impersonation, planting of evidence, etc. could survive without a single crack. It belies belief.

This doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate areas of inquiry. The major problem is that the critics have not yet developed a talent to filter out the unwarranted charges and focus on the more important issues. This need to throw out some sacred cows and begin to focus on the real issues cannot be overstated.

Posner's biggest mistake was in claiming that the case was closed. It's not. Dr. Gary Aguilar sums up some of the outstanding medical issues in a cogent article in the Fourth Decade. There are still questions on the acoustics evidence. Oswald's possible relationships with various intelligence agencies are in question. So, the case is still very much open. However, just as the "lone-nutters" must admit there are areas that remain to be investigated, the "conspiracy freaks" must start discarding some of their many sacred cows. "

Regarding the " Watergate " affair, I met in person by synchronicity the man who installed the taping system in the White House by which these tapes were recorded during the Nixon years. In our meeting it was explained to me that the " Bay of Pigs " mentioned on the tapes was the code for the " JFK Assassination " and another code, the " Texas Boys " eluded to the some of above mentioned people. It is no secret that President Nixon from the beginning and during much of the relevations leading up to his resignation was attempting to bribe the CIA and one of its agents was on these tapes during these conversa

Main Page - Friday, 02/02/07

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]

APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES

messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)