JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots

[Laurel]

"Oswald" Rifle found without a clip?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid6.htm
"1985 book Reasonable Doubt, Henry Hurt intones:

Without a clip, the cartridges must be hand-loaded, one by one, making rapid shooting flatly impossible.
There is not a shred of positive evidence that such a clip was found with the Mannlicher-Carcano in the sniper's nest. (p. 103) "

That link has a picture of the rifle with the clip clearly visible!!!

Profmunkin, why did you link to a well-known anti-conspiracy site to make your case for a conspiracy? Were you hoping that none of us were familiar with John McAdams? Did you think we were too lazy to click on the link and read this quote in context?

[gillianren]

For heaven's sake, I linked to that site earlier!

[Echnaton]

Equivocation.  The phrase "cut off" is used two ways here.  You use it to say the conversation was stopped before Bowers was finished, while in the quote Bowers is saying the conversation stopped because it was finished.

Lee Bowers interview

See for yourself

What I heard is Bowers stating that there were three shots.  Do you still care to use this interview to support your theory of 6 shots from 3 shooters?

[Echnaton]

BTW, Profmunkin, you never answered my question of weather you had actually been to Dealey Plaza.  Have you?

[profmunkin]

BTW, Profmunkin, you never answered my question of weather you had actually been to Dealey Plaza.  Have you?

Yes, I have visited Dealey Plaza and the TSBD museum.

[profmunkin]

Either way you look at it, there is no way to reconcile the idea of them using multiple shooters in multiple locations and then trying to use a lone gunman cover story as the action of a halfway competent intelligence agency. Even multiple shooters in the same location would have been a better idea. If a whole bunch of us can see that without even thinking about it, how did an agency supposedly adept at arranging secret assassinations with plenty of preparation time utterly fail to do so and instead come up with such a ludicrous plan?

If the public can be convinced it was a single gunman, then it is single crazy nut, end of a sad story.
If there were more then one shooter, it is a conspiracy.

Ludicrous plan? What are you talking about, it worked didn't it?

[gillianren]

If the public can be convinced it was a single gunman, then it is single crazy nut, end of a sad story.

What the public does or doesn't think is not, in the long run, relevant.  The evidence shows a single shooter from a single location.  The autopsy shows a single shooter from a single location.  That some people are so ridiculously determined to assert a conspiracy despite the fact that most of the claims don't make even a little bit of sense says more about the people making the claims than about the events in question.

If there were more then one shooter, it is a conspiracy.

Actually, there doesn't even have to be more than one shooter.  Having one shooter would be the most sensible way of doing things even with a conspiracy, as a minute of studying real criminal cases would show.

Ludicrous plan? What are you talking about, it worked didn't it?

Yes, Lee Harvey Oswald made his shot and killed Kennedy.  We're still waiting for you to show even a little evidence that it was something else.

[Jason Thompson]

If the public can be convinced it was a single gunman, then it is single crazy nut, end of a sad story.

And the best way to convince them of that is to have multiple shooters spread all over the place, is it?

If there were more then one shooter, it is a conspiracy.

Which, as I and others have said, is a damn good reason not to use multiple shooters if the planned cover story is that one lone nutter did the job, or to have the lone gunman as a cover story if you are going to use multiple shooters.

Ludicrous plan? What are you talking about, it worked didn't it?

Nice circular reasoning there.

Are you seriously suggesting that a conspiracy was hatched to convince the world that Kennedy was shot in the back by a lone gunman and that to do this they decided to have a few gunmen dotted around the location? Forensic analysis of bullet trajectories was quite a mature science by that time. Why hatch a plan that runs the risk of discovery if they find that he was hit by two bullets going in opposite directions?

You have yet to prove that there were multiple shooters. If you can manage that I'll be impressed. So far you don't seem to know what evidence is, and your own links to evidence include things that contradict the statements you are trying to support.

[Echnaton]

If the public can be convinced it was a single gunman, then it is single crazy nut, end of a sad story.

This is typical conspiracist thinking, and sadly unrelated to the real world.  The assumption is that some unspecified and unitary "public" will be the only judge of the events and once its mind is made up, nothing will change it.  Much as the Apollo hoax proponents see NASA and its contractors as one unified body that can act in compartmentalized fashion.   Both are a convenient illusion of the conspiracists to gloss over the huge failing in their own need to provide evidence. 

The argument designed is to set the burden of proof at some arbitrary level such that for the conspiracy theory to be proved true, it only has to be argued that the conspiracy was capable of temporarily deceiving some imaginary cohort for a unstated period of time.

Or Profmunkin do you disagree and can specify a the burden of proof you are intending to meet?

Ludicrous plan? What are you talking about, it worked didn't it?

  Circular reasoning.


edited for clarity

[Echnaton]

BTW, Profmunkin, you never answered my question of weather you had actually been to Dealey Plaza.  Have you?

Yes, I have visited Dealey Plaza and the TSBD museum.

And did you notice that any shots from the Grassy Knoll would not have Hit JFK front on, but more from up and to the side?  Which still leaves open the question of what happens to the bullet? Since the head shot didn't hit Jackie or the limo, what happened to it.  And please don't try the magic bullet trajectory of making a sharp ricochet and exit at the back of the head without citing a source that provides a detailed, expert analysis.

[ka9q]

If the public can be convinced it was a single gunman, then it is single crazy nut, end of a sad story.

Not at all, because as others have pointed out, even a single shooter could have a conspiracy behind it. That's why the WC looked at Oswald's background in painstaking detail to see if he worked with anyone, was assisted by anyone, or was put up to the assassination by anyone.

Everything they found said not only "no" but "hell no" -- Oswald was simply not the kind of person who took orders from anyone but himself.

[ka9q]

Regarding the clip for the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, Youtube user mag30th owns one and has produced several videos debunking the more common myths about this rifle's supposed poor quality. Here's one:

In this one he rapidly exercises the bolt without firing the weapon to show that it could be operated very quickly and smoothly. He then loads another full clip from the top, and I notice that the empty clip then falls out of the bottom of the magazine. That would indicate that you wouldn't expect to find the clip in the rifle as (or after) it was being fired.

[profmunkin]

The autopsy shows a single shooter from a single location.

Do you think you know more then all of these witnesses about the head wound?

And http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Ballistics_and_head_wounds.html
"thanks in part to newly released HSCA interview files, we now know that witness after witness at the autopsy told Committee investigators that the large wound was in back of the head.
I have not read much from the HSCA but this information certainly is in accordance with reports from Douglas Horne.
Note: this page goes into detail about how the head wound could not in all likelyhood be produced by the carcano rifle firing FMJ missiles.

Before we can seriously discuss how the wounds were made, lets establish the FACT that the autopsy report given to the WC is a fabrication.

[Echnaton]

Before we can seriously discuss how the wounds were made, lets establish the FACT that the autopsy report given to the WC is a fabrication.

Yes, why don't you do that.

[profmunkin]

And did you notice that any shots from the Grassy Knoll would not have Hit JFK front on, but more from up and to the side?  Which still leaves open the question of what happens to the bullet? Since the head shot didn't hit Jackie or the limo, what happened to it.  And please don't try the magic bullet trajectory of making a sharp ricochet and exit at the back of the head without citing a source that provides a detailed, expert analysis.

Most likely a frangible missile, it broke up into a score of fragments, it liquefied right half of the Presidents brain as it bore thru exploding out the back side of his head. Every witness to the head shot in motorcade and near the limo testified to this. Witnesses in motorcade and near the limo testified to rifle report coming from grassy knoll area. Every witness at Parkland corroborated this wound in the back of the Presidents head. Witnesses at the Bethesda autopsy corroborated the location of wound.
Even DPD Chief Jesse Curry in 1977 interview, in you tube video I previously posted agreed with this.

I don't understand the ballistics as to angle of attack and results, but there is no doubt that there was massive damage to the back right side of JFK's head.