Not the best of rebuttals joely

1) he was an excellent shooter in the marines
.......

Whilst in the marines, you could be categorised In three levels of shooting ability, according to the scores they achieved at a standardised test of their accuracy:

Expert: a score of 220 to 250.
Sharpshooter: 210 to 219.
Marksman: 190 to 209.

According to his Marine score card (Commission Exhibit 239), Oswald was tested twice:
In December 1956, after “a very intensive 3 weeks’ training period” (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.11, p.302), Oswald scored 212: two marks above the minimum for a ‘sharpshooter’.

In May 1959, he scored 191: one mark above the minimum for a ‘marksman’.

Colonel Allison Folsom interpreted the results for the Warren Commission:

The Marine Corps consider that any reasonable application of the instructions given to Marines should permit them to become qualified at least as a marksman. To become qualified as a sharpshooter, the Marine Corps is of the opinion that most Marines with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can become so qualified. Consequently, a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor “shot” and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good “shot”.(Warren Commission Hearings, vol.19, pp.17f)

Folsom agreed with his (not her) questioner that Oswald “was not a particularly outstanding shot” (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.8, p.311).

Ahhh, everyone can have a bad day. Sturridge didn't score on Tuesday......


He is not an sharpshooter

Not the best of rebuttals joely
======

maybe you can counter the 9 points I made then? those were facts that cannot be disputed.

you also neglected to add metro that when asked to compare the differences between the shots (warren commission chapter 4 p191) major Anderson said

"It might have been a day for firing the rifle - rain, dark, windy......There is some possibility that the rifle he was firing was not as good as the one as he was firing in his A course because he may have been carrying his rifle for a long time and it got banged around"

secondly metro, the distance he was at the firing range was 200 yards and on the kennedy was <90 yards away.

Later tests conducted by US ballistics research lab proved that it could be achieved by using riflemen to re-enact the assassination. They had no practice beforehand and in the first series managed to pass off their three bullets in ~ 8 seconds (modern analysis showed time between first shot and fatal shot in the zapruder film was 8.3 seconds). The second series the expert riflemen required 7 seconds. I repeat none of riflemen had any practice beforehand

there is no doubt that lee Harvey Oswald was the only shooter

maybe you can counter the 9 points I made then? those were facts that cannot be disputed.
=================================================================================
I think many of the above points have in fact, been disputed, by various different theories.

I tend not to believe in conspiracy theories (and I think the 911 one is nuts), but the Kennedy assassination is the only one that really makes me wonder, because the official story itself has quite a few implausibilities in it.

Even before I read anything about it, (and I only did so recently), I was always suspicious that a member of Joe Public, with no ostensible connection to the assassination, could wander into Police HQ and shoot a man held in custody for the crime of the century. Really??? That’s potentially pretty handy...how easy is that, usually?

Also, amidst all that chaos, they identified the gun, and did a head-count at the Book Depository, concluding that Oswald was the only employee missing (nobody else , it seems, had left the building to see what all the fuss was about). Then put out an APB for him, all within 15 minutes. So they were a lot more efficient than any of the fire drills I’ve ever participated in, that’s for sure. Ffiteen minutes is pretty swift work.

But there are oddities in the conspiracy theories, too, so it all gets very complicated.
So maybe it’s true that a lone nutter planned to assassinate the President, and then make his cunning getaway by catching a bus back to his digs. But even if it is true, there appears to be strong evidence of cover-ups.

This may not necessarily be because there was a conspiracy...events like these often expose truths which the likes of the CIA do not want people to know. Colonel Fletcher Prouty, for example, who was a liaison officer between the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA, believed that Oswald had worked for the CIA. Even if he acted alone, they may not have wanted people to know that.

And people who worked on the Select Committee on Assassinations, in 1977, concluded that the FBI, and more particularly the CIA, had been very un-cooperative to their investigation. Richard Sprague, the original chief counsel, was subject to the standard attacks on his character, and was either sacked or resigned, depending on whose version you believe.

So many people connected in some way to the assassination have died prematurely (and sometimes violently), that The Sunday Times once commissioned an actuary to work out the odds of all these premature deaths, and the actuary came up with a figure of 100,000 trillion to one against . But this upset the US government,and a lot of others, so the Sunday Times had to retract it, and apologise.

Gerald Posner wrote a book in 1993 (called ‘Case Closed’ ) with the objective of dispelling all the conspiracy theories, and spent 600 pages attacking them. But even he later ventured the opinion that with a decent enough lawyer, Oswald could feasibly have been acquitted (which implies that even he thinks the evidence did not meet the requirement of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ ).

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Kemlyn

I am inclined to agree with you here. The JFK one does have a hell of a lot of questions that are still unanswered.

Lots of differnet US Agencies appeared to be adding to and taking away evidence. Even JFK's brother was involved in this.

IMO this is one of those where the Governments verision of events is only part truth. IMO no one will ever really know all the exact details of what went down 50 years ago.

JF Kennedy has been shot?
==============================================
Good question.
If you read all the literature on it, you end up not sure

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

===
I think many of the above points have in fact, been disputed, by various different theories.
===

Could you please expand?

===
I tend not to believe in conspiracy theories (and I think the 911 one is nuts), but the Kennedy assassination is the only one that really makes me wonder, because the official story itself has quite a few implausibilities in it.
===

could you please expand again?

If Oswald was innocent why did he leave work? he denied owning a rifle but this was contradicted by his house keeper (the gun was missing from his garage), why did the prints match that on the rifle? why did he murder JD tippit? the cartridge casings matched the same revolver Oswald was found to have had at the time of his arrest? these are not the makings of a "patsy"

Could you please expand?
==========================================
No, because I’m not getting into a long debate defending theories that I haven’t concluded are true.

All I’ve concluded is that there are a lot of difficult to explain oddities in the official story, too, and I indicated what some of these oddities were in my initial post.

You listed 9 things that “cannot be disputed” , and I pointed out that at least 6 of them have been disputed, (1, 4, 5, 6,7, 9) but I’m not going to argue the case for these disputes, because I don’t know enough about it, and there’s already miles of print out there detailing these arguments.

LHO done it.
=============================================
Gerald Posner wrote 600 pages in order make that case, ( though strangely concluded that Oswald might have been acquitted by a good lawyer). Vincent Bugliosi wrote 1600 pages making the same case. The Warren Commission report ran to something like 10 million words.

All expertly summarised by the words “LHO done it”

(Not all of the conspiracy theories, btw, dispute that LHO did it. Most of them only question whether he did it alone).

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I saw the Gavin Esler programme which I thought quite convincing.Think I said this at the beginning.
==============================================
The problem with that film is the same as the problems with the conspiracy theories.

There is so much conflicting (and strange) evidence out there now that it’s practically impossible to come up with a theory (including the official, ‘lone gunman’ theory), that can’t be contradicted by other evidence, or which doesn’t depend on omissions

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6446

"maybe you can counter the 9 points I made then? those were facts that cannot be disputed"

.... Huh? Did you not read my previous post. Your very first 'supposed' fact was blown out of the water.

"you also neglected to add metro that when asked to compare the differences between the shots (warren commission chapter 4 p191) major Anderson said
"It might have been a day for firing the rifle - rain, dark, windy......There is some possibility that the rifle he was firing was not as good as the one as he was firing in his A course because he may have been carrying his rifle for a long time and it got banged around"

.... Errr what's there to neglect? Why would anybody think it important to bring up the possibility that it may have been raining when acquiring his record? We may as well suppose anything.

Also, a 100 yard difference is one thing but a moving target is another. And seeing as though you like to suppose, why dont we suppose that Oswald would have been nervous, filled with adrenaline etc.

You also mention the re-enactments of the shooting. Interesting you mention this. CBS news did a reenactment in 1967 involving several expert riflemen firing from a 60 foot tower at a moving sled using a similar Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

None of these expert riflemen hit the target twice on their first try and 7 of them failed to do so on any try.
They also were able to fire several practice rounds before the test.

The Warren Commission’s tests were equally bad. The WC paid 3 expert riflemen to duplicate Oswald’s alleged feat. These shooters fired 18 rounds using Oswald’s gun and scope.
They fired 3 rounds with just the iron sites. These shooters missed the head and neck area of the target 18 out of 18 times using the telescopic sight and 2 out of 3 times when they used the iron sites.
Some of the shots missed the target completely. They were able to take as long as they wanted for the first shot. They were firing from a height of only 30 feet. Oswald fired from a height of 60 feet. They were also shooting at stationary targets instead of a moving limousine.

Former Marines recall that Oswald was a poor shot.
Nelson Delgado said Oswald on the firing line was “a pretty big joke” because he got a lot of complete misses.
Delgado told researcher Mark Lane that Oswald just was not that interested in guns. He was always being penalized for not taking proper care of his rifle or cleaning it regularly.

Sherman Cooley, another Marine, said “If I had to pick one man in the entire United States to shoot me, I’d pick Oswald. I saw the man shoot. There’s no way he could have ever learned to shoot well enough to do what they accused him of doing in Dallas.”

Henry Hurt, author of “Reasonable Doubt” interviewed many of Oswald’s fellow Marines. Hurt said “On the subject of Oswald’s shooting ability, there was virtually no exception to Delgado’s opinion that it was laughable.

Many of the Marines said that Oswald had a certain lack of coordination that they felt was responsible for the fact that he had difficulty learning to shoot.”

When he was a member of a hunting club in Minsk, Russia Oswald’s fellow members considered him a bad marksman.

Craig Roberts was a former Marine sniper who later wrote a book on the JFK assassination called “Kill Zone.” Roberts visited the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository and instantly realized that Oswald could not have performed the shooting feat because he knew that he himself could not. And he was a professional.

Roberts interviewed Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, the former senior instructor at the Marines Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. Roberts asked Hathcock if he thought Oswald could have done what the Warren Commission said he did. Hathcock said no.
Hathcock reconstructed the assassination at Quantico: the angle, moving target, time limit etc. he told Roberts,
“I don’t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did.
Again, we are talking about professionals. Men who completely outclass Oswald in raw shooting ability. But further, these are professional assassins who practice their skills almost daily.”

Dean Andrews, an attorney in New Orleans who met Oswald testified before the Warren Commission.
Andrews said “I know good and well Oswald did not kill the President. With that weapon, he couldn’t have been capable of making 3 controlled shots in that short time. I am basing my opinion on 5 years as an ordnance man in the Navy.

You just don’t pick up a rifle or a pistol or whatever weapon you are using and stay proficient with it. You have to know what you are doing. This boy could have connived the deal, but I think he is a patsy.”

So you stick with comments about the rain and i'll continue to make a mockery of your supposed facts.

Its also nice to see a couple of others put you to the sword on here

All opinions and nothing based on facts from either side.

But hey my opinion is.........

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

All opinions and nothing based on facts from either side.
================================================
Precisely. And what is the verdict in a court of law when that position is arrived at?

================================================
But hey my opinion is.........
================================================
That nobody knows, and that there as many strange discrepancies in the official story as in the various conspiracy theories.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Bermuda Triangle

don't hate

"maybe you can counter the 9 points I made then? those were facts that cannot be disputed"

.... Huh? Did you not read my previous post. Your very first 'supposed' fact was blown out of the water.
=======

actually this proved me correct.

also, I notice you failed to comment on the fact I blew you out of the water when you said the third shot could not have come from behind. I then showed you a video of the head actually moving forward during impact.. that comment metro is up there with one of the embarrassing own goals in the history of ja606

once again metro I shall ask you to contradict each of the facts I presented unless you prove with physical evidence otherwise.

ie why was Oswald the only employee leave the book depository after the shooting? why did he shoot tippit? why did the cartridge cases in Oswald's gun at the time of the arrest match that found at tippit's murder? why did he bunk into the cinema? the 6.5 mm marcano rifle that Oswald owned (confirmed by marina Oswald) was missing from ruth paine's garage when the police searched it-what happened to it (this was matched to the gun that killed kennedy), who is the person standing in the window of the 6th floor in this photograph

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063459/End-JFK-conspiracy-theories-Digital-technology-proves-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-acted-alone.html

Wesley frazier drove Oswald to work that day and testified that he was carrying a long package. why did Oswald refuse a lie detector test? hadwriting experts identified the order for the murder weapon matched oswalds

And the not getting off three shots.In the Gavin Esler piece an old man did it comfortably
=========

that is probably the best jfk programme I have seen. even had Oswald's brother. remember watching that for the 40th...can't believe that was 10 years ago